Major South Korean cryptocurrency exchange Upbit will reportedly begin operations in Singapore next month. The new exchange will offer Singapore dollar trading as well as crypto-to-crypto pairs in three markets offered by Bittrex, Upbit’s US-based partner.
Dunamu Inc., the operator of the Kakao-backed exchange Upbit, said on Wednesday that it is launching a cryptocurrency exchange in Singapore next month, Yonhap reported.
Upbit is currently South Korea’s second largest crypto exchange. At the time of writing, its 24-hour trading volume is approximately $229 million, second only to Bithumb which has a 24-hour trading volume of $392 million. At present, Upbit has 271 cryptocurrencies listed.
Dunamu established a Singaporean branch office in February and has been preparing for an exchange launch ever since, the news outlet conveyed. Kim Kook-hyun, head of Upbit’s Singaporean branch, was quoted saying:
As Singapore has proactively supported blockchain technology, our advancement into the nation will help us secure many chances to lead a variety of relevant projects and to have global competitiveness.
Without revealing the exact launch date, the company confirmed that it will be in “early October.”
Singapore was picked as the firm’s first overseas expansion because of “the city-state’s strong support for blockchain and related technologies,” the Investor stated, adding that the firm plans to expand to more countries in the future.
At the Upbit Developer Conference held on Jeju Island, Dunamu CEO Lee Sir-goo confirmed that Upbit will not be issuing its own cryptocurrency. Referring to the exchange’s expansion to Singapore, he told reporters:
We don’t want to lose out on the opportunities now…If we wait until the Korean crypto exchange environment improves, we could lag behind our global competitors.
Plans for Upbit Singapore
The new exchange will be headed by Alex Kim who previously served as the head of Kakao Indonesia, the Investor described, elaborating:
The Upbit Singapore [exchange] will be serviced in English and offer Singapore dollar trading. It will also support crypto-to-crypto pairs, including Upbit’s US partner Bittrex’s bitcoin, ethereum and tether markets.
Lee detailed, “In the future we would like to add other fiat currencies and expand to other countries in Southeast Asia,” emphasizing that Upbit will continue to strengthen its partnership with Bittrex as it expands globally.
For the launch promotion, trading fees in the Singapore dollar market will be waived for one month for “users who complete their subscription and self-certification,” the publication noted.
Recently, several companies have expanded to Singapore. Line, the Japanese subsidiary of Korean internet giant Naver, has launched a crypto exchange called Bitbox in Singapore. In addition, Binance is beta testing a fiat exchange in the country, CEO Changpeng Zhao revealed last week.
What do you think of Upbit expanding to Singapore? Let us know in the comments section below.
Images courtesy of Shutterstock and Upbit.
Need to calculate your bitcoin holdings? Check our tools section.
Since the inception of cryptocurrency, some critics have dubbed it “just another fiat money.” This has been the wail of anti-crypto combatants. They have succumbed to grasping at straws in order to manufacture any rebuttal against the thing they loathe. It doesn’t matter how valid the argument is so long as it satisfies their desire to smear crypto.
Using this kind of non-argument is akin to raising the dead. When one cannot count on truth to win the day, they reach back in time to deploy old, tired bromides. Jimmy Song performed his own ritual for the dead during a debate with Roger Ver at the Coinsbank Cruise on September 10th.
Instead of articulating a legitimate problem with bitcoin cash, Jimmy claimed it is a “centralized fiat money.” This is virtually the same broken premise crypto-antagonists have trotted out ever since Satoshi penned the white paper, including naysayers like Peter Schiff. It was a tragedy to witness, because fiat currency means something entirely different than what Jimmy believed.
What is Fiat Currency?
Fiat currency is money that is issued by decree or formal authorization. To be more specific, by decree means it is backed by a government’s alleged authority, and then enforced on the population by law — at the barrel of a gun. Generally, when a money is decreed by government, using other kinds of competing paper money is considered a criminal act.
For example, when Bernard Von Nothaus created the Liberty Dollar and attempted to put it into circulation, thugs in costumes raided his company headquarters. They put him in jail and charged him with counterfeiting and fraud.
No one is forcing anyone to use bitcoin cash. No men in costumes are coming to arrest those who use bitcoin cash. It is an opt-in, voluntary cryptocurrency.
“Fiat money is currency that a government has declared to be legal tender, but it is not backed by a physical commodity.”
Why Bitcoin Cash is not Fiat currency
This is why bitcoin cash, or any other crypto, is not fiat. It is not decreed or authorized by government. It is not “legal tender.” It is possible that a digital currency can eventually be decreed, but then it is likely the “cryptocurrency” in question will not be cryptocurrency in the traditional sense.
For example, the Russian government has talked about creating the “Crypto Ruble,” which would act as their version of cryptocurrency. The problem is it would not be minable, and it would be manipulable by that government. A true cryptocurrency would not possess these “features.”
Jimmy claimed bitcoin cash was fiat currency, because he believed it is “authorized authoritatively.” Jimmy mentioned bitcoin cash was “paternalistic and Keynesian.” He also said it was “controlled by a central authority.”
Bitcoin cash is an open-source and peer-to-peer cryptocurrency that anyone can get involved in and use. It is not “Keynesian.” The amount of cryptocurrency issued into existence cannot be arbitrarily determined. It is determined by the protocol, and is the exact same as bitcoin: 21 million units will be minted by year 2140.
Keynesian economists believe the economy should be controlled and stabilized by government printing of money to prevent economic catastrophe. The bitcoin cash protocol functions antithetically to Keynesian ideology. No one can arbitrarily inflate or deflate the supply of bitcoin cash.
Clearly, Jimmy did not read the primary source on Keynesian economics as Roger pointed out.
Jimmy might have only been trying to argue that bitcoin cash is centralized. However, that is a MUCH DIFFERENT argument than claiming bitcoin cash is fiat. Of course, most people who claim some crypto is “centralized” do not really define what they mean by “centralized.” Bitcoin and bitcoin cash are also both a bit centralized in terms of mining operations. However, the problem is overstated.
Mining in bitcoin and bitcoin cash is more centralized as a result of limited adoption. This means only a handful of mining pools control the networks. However, the more users that begin to adopt cryptocurrency, the more mining operations will appear. This will mitigate the problem of centralization. Regardless, what matters is cryptocurrency remains censorship resistant.
In this regard, bitcoin cash is more censorship resistant than bitcoin core, which has had transactions censored because they got stuck in the mempool when fees skyrocketed. In this sense, one can make the case that bitcoin core is less censorship resistant than bitcoin cash. Therefore, bitcoin core is more “centralized.”
Crypto Paternalism and the Case for Op-Codes
Jimmy’s claim that bitcoin cash is paternalistic was the most problematic comment of the debate. A paternalistic cryptocurrency would mean that it is controlled by an oligarchic cult of developers. In terms of the ecosystem, bitcoin cash does not fit this criteria. It is truly open source in the sense that developers have wide-ranging leeway to build protocols on top of it.
Many of the op-codes have been re-enabled on the bitcoin cash protocol. This means developers have the ability to create new tools and programs. Some have already been developed, such as the Wormhole protocol and platforms like Memo.cash. Ironically, this is impossible on the bitcoin core network because of a mixture of high fees, disabled op-codes, and developer hegemony.
If anything, bitcoin core is more “paternalistic” and strict in terms of who has the right to develop on top of the protocol in a truly open source fashion. What protocol is really the most “paternalistic”?
Conclusion: Mind your Argument, Jimmy
In the end, Jimmy could not muster a strong argument against bitcoin cash so he resurrected a long-dead one and resorted to hand-wringing and arm-waving. The tragedy is there are certainly questions that need to be addressed regarding bitcoin cash, but it being a “fiat money” is not one of them.
This suggests Jimmy did not intend on making a case against bitcoin cash, but instead wanted to incite drama during a debate. It was just surprising that he would have premised his whole position on an argument that some people make against bitcoin core itself. That alone should have signaled to him that he was reaching.
Do you bitcoin or bitcoin cash is fiat currency? Let us know in the comments section below.
Images courtesy of Shutterstock, Cryptocomes, and Coinsbank Cruise
OP-ed disclaimer: This is an Op-ed article. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own. Bitcoin.com does not endorse nor support views, opinions or conclusions drawn in this post. Bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy or quality within the Op-ed article. Readers should do their own due diligence before taking any actions related to the content. Bitcoin.com is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any information in this Op-ed article.
Over the last 24 hours, the cryptocurrency community has been discussing a critical vulnerability that was found in the Bitcoin Core (BTC) reference client. A bug introduced in Bitcoin Core version 0.14, that also affects all subsequent versions, could have caused a great majority of current Core nodes to crash. According to the developer’s Optech newsletter, Core contributors released a patch that fixes Core version 0.16.2 and the latest 0.16.3 fix requires an immediate upgrade.
An Anonymous Individual Discloses a Critical Bug Found in Bitcoin Core Clients
The whole community is talking about a vulnerable bug that was introduced into the Bitcoin Core reference client two years ago. The issue found in Bitcoin Core software (patched now) versions 0.14 and above has brought about another heated discussion concerning the fallibility of developers, and using a single reference client as opposed to using multiple implementations. The bug in question went unnoticed for two years when it was introduced in November of 2016 and a great majority of Core contributors accepted (ACK) the change without many questions.
According to developers, the bugs’ patch release notes, and the Optech newsletter, an anonymous individual reported the bug to Core contributors. Essentially, the vulnerability found in Bitcoin Core software would have allowed a malicious actor with a mere 12.5 BTC to crash roughly 90 percent of Core nodes. The Fast Internet Bitcoin Relay Engine (FIBRE) baked into Core would have made matters worse because of the way FIBRE propagates blocks.
“[CVE-2018-17144] A bug introduced in Bitcoin Core 0.14.0 and affecting all subsequent versions through to 0.16.2 will cause Bitcoin Core to crash when attempting to validate a block containing a transaction that attempts to spend the same input twice,” explains the Optech newsletter.
Such blocks would be invalid and so can only be created by miners willing to lose the allowed income from having created a block (at least 12.5 XBT or $80,000 USD).
Are Bugs and Exploits a Compelling Argument for Multiple Clients?
Of course, the bug started a ferocious debate in regard to the BTC community putting Core developers up high on a pedestal all these years. Further, the bug re-invoked a compelling argument for multiple clients. For example, Bitcoin ABC released a patch for the vulnerability two days ago, but both Bitcoin XT and Bitcoin Unlimited were unaffected by the issue. On Reddit Bitcoin Unlimited’s Peter Rizun has emphasized this is why having multiple implementations is a good idea.
“Wow, isn’t this one of the most serious consensus bugs ever? It affects all BTC Core nodes and the only thing preventing unbound inflation is the fact that the nodes crash, taking down the entire BTC Core network instead,” Rizun says on September 19.
Maybe multiple implementations aren’t such a bad idea, after all, Greg Maxwell? I think only ABC is affected for Bitcoin Cash.
The issue people have with a majority dependence on one reference client, is because some people say history has shown that alternative clients can be very beneficial when critical bugs are discovered, like the one introduced in Bitcoin Core 0.14. For instance, when over the last couple of years consensus bugs were found in Ethereum’s Geth, the network still had Parity clients to rely on and vice versa.
At the time of writing, there are 9628 nodes running on the BTC network and 9135 are Bitcoin Core nodes. That’s 94 percent of the BTC network running one reference client and every node is affected by any issues found within Core’s codebase. This means bugs not only have to be fixed fast, but mandatory upgrades have to be speedy too. In contrast to the BTC network dominated by Core nodes, there are currently 2006 nodes running on the BCH network but only 59 percent are Bitcoin ABC nodes. So much like the ETH network, client diversity gives BCH 738 Bitcoin Unlimited (BU) nodes covering 39 percent of the network.
Additionally, according to a comment on r/bitcoin, Lightning Nodes could also be vulnerable to attacks due to the recent Bitcoin Core bug.
The recent bug confirms to many cryptocurrency proponents that being dependent on one development team’s QA process, as opposed to client diversity and multiple development teams, can be extremely risky — Especially when an exploit like this is found in production and tethered to a $100 billion dollar system.
What do you think about the bug found? Do you think multiple clients is a better way to avoid bugs and exploits? Let us know what you think about this story in the comment section below.
Images via Shutterstock, Twitter, and Coindance nodes.
Want to create your own secure cold storage paper wallet? Check our tools section.
A group of artists hailing from across the globe will congregate in France to showcase an exhibition celebrating the upcoming tenth anniversary of Bitcoin. The art will be available for purchase using several different cryptocurrencies.
International Artists Congregate in France to Celebrate Upcoming Tenth Anniversary of Bitcoin
Art(r)evolution, an exhibition celebrating Bitcoin’s upcoming double-figure birthday, will see “international artists from various horizons [exhibiting] their works around the theme of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies” in Paris, France.
According to the exhibition’s website, “The exhibition will show the potential of cryptocurrencies through symbolism and practice,” and “will illustrate the genesis of this digital revolution.”
The exhibition is open to the public and will take place from the 28th of September until the 5th of October.
BTC to Be Hidden in Certain Artworks
The works exhibited will be available for purchase using BTC, ETH, XMR, or LTC. The exhibition’s website states that “[BTC] will be hidden in some works and certificates of authenticity registered in the [BTC] blockchain will also be issued to buyers.”
The exhibition’s organizer, French artist Pascal Boyart, stated: “We had the idea to organize an exhibition in Paris to show possible use cases of cryptocurrencies and connect the international crypto-friendly artists.”
Brian O’Hagen, marketing manager of exhibition sponsor Coinhouse, added: “France, through Paris, is well positioned to become the capital of this new artistic movement between art and crypto. Crypto Art redefines the way an artist can engage his audience. The advent of cryptocurrencies is not just a monetary revolution, it’s also a cultural revolution.”
Exhibition to Explore Decentralization and the Art Industry
According to the exhibition’s website, it seeks to provide “a unique opportunity to decode the potential upheavals that cryptocurrency and blockchain can cause in the world of art.” The themes explored include whether “selling works without intermediaries [is] now possible” and if cryptocurrencies comprise a vehicle for “freeing yourself from the art market and banking system.”
The artists featured at the exhibition will include Pascal Boyart, Andy Bauch, Coin Artist, Josephine Bellini, Nanu Berks, Bern Mark, Yosh, Saint Phalle Yom, Choq, Youl, and Ilies Issiakhem.
Do you think that cryptocurrencies will significantly disrupt the art industry? Share your thoughts in the comments section below!
Images courtesy of Shutterstock
The Bitcoin universe is vast. So is Bitcoin.com. Check ourWiki, where you can learn everything you were afraid to ask. Or read ournews coverage to stay up to date on the latest. Or delve into statistics on our helpfultools page.