I guess, i still do.
Nothing can stop cryptocurrency from emerging. It is a phenomenon bound to happen and there is nothing we can do but to embrace it. Although i cannot say the same thing about bounties. Frankly speaking, i'm a little bit skeptical on bounties for sometime now because of scams taking place here and there. No matter how hard we do our research, there is just no assurance that we're dealing with legit ones. Nonetheless, i'm not precluding myself in participating from time to time. I'm still keen on giving those bounties the benefit of the doubt.

Very much so. Bitcoin was hailed the king on the cryptocurrency market and the most valuable one. Even though some Altcoins in reality have far more effective and unique use cases of blockchain technology, most crypto enthusiasts still regard Bitcoin as the most important asset in all of cryptocurrencies. However as far as i can see, the existence of Altcoins doesn't really matter, Bitcoins will still benefit from the competition. After all Bitcoin is the root of it all.

The chairman of the United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) believes Ether (ETH) is a commodity — and that ETH futures trading is becoming a reality.

Heath Tarbert, who overtook J. Christopher Giancarlo in July, revealed his stance toward cryptocurrencies and forked coins at the All Markets Summit on Oct. 10, Yahoo Finance reports.

First CFTC guidance on Ether
While the CFTC has been very clear that Bitcoin is a commodity, this is reportedly the first time that the authority has provided a vision for Ether, the second-biggest cryptocurrency by market cap. Tarbert said:

   “We've been very clear on bitcoin: bitcoin is a commodity. We haven't said anything about ether—until now [...] It is my view as
   chairman of the CFTC that ether is a commodity.”

“Similar digital assets should be treated similarly”
According to the report, Tarbert acknowledges the existing uncertainty about the status of altcoins. However, he claimed that similar digital assets should be treated similarly.

Tarbert suggested that forked cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin Cash (BCH) or Ethereum Classic (ETC) — those that derive from the original underlying blockchain — should be treated the same as the original asset. At the same time, the chairman noted that the status of a forked coin may alter if the “fork itself raises some securities law issues under that classic Howey Test.”

Tarbert reportedly claimed:

   “It stands to reason that similarly assets should be treated similarly. If the underlying asset, the original digital asset, hasn’t been
   determined to be a security and is therefore a commodity, most likely the forked asset will be the same.”

CFTC in the news
In December 2018, the CFTC announced its intention to release a Request for Information in order to acquire public comments and guidance on the Ethereum blockchain. At the time, the authority was willing to better understand the differences and similarities between Ether and Bitcoin (BTC).

In mid-September, the CFTC appointed former Coinbase vice president Dorothy D. DeWitt as new director of market oversight.


source:  https://cointelegraph.com/news/us-cftc-chairman-says-ether-is-a-commodity-eth-futures-coming-next

Ethereum (ETH) venture production studio ConsenSys has announced that it had fully acquired Infura, a blockchain infrastructure provider that the firm previously backed.

According to the blog post published on Oct. 4, Infura will continue its operations as a wholly owned business unit within the studio. Infura also noted that ConsenSys’s founder Joseph Lubin was one of the startup’s early investors.

Centralization criticism
Infura is providing Ethereum infrastructure for building decentralized applications, allowing developers to deploy their solutions without hosting their own full node. In July 2019, the firm launched Infura+ and introduced three new subscription tiers.

In March 2019, digital asset research company Delphi Digital published a report pointing to the alleged centralization of the startup. The report argued that by using Infura, developers rely on the infrastructure entirely operated by ConsenSys and hosted by Amazon Web Services, which creates a single point of failure that decentralization is designed to avoid.

In late September, ConsenSys launched the Impactio platform to bring transparency into philanthropy in partnership with the World Wildlife Fund.


source:  https://cointelegraph.com/news/consensys-fully-acquires-ethereum-infrastructure-provider-infura

Definitely not. As compared to Bitcoins September value of almost $11K, it dropped to just above $8K at present time. But there exists a huge possibility that its value will rise again. Because Bitcoin always - always bounces back from its doldrums.
so we just have to be patient and remain focus on our goal of acquiring much greater rewards from our Bitcoin when the right time comes.

After more than a year spent ensuring full compliance with the United States authorities, Bakkt, the first federally regulated platform for Bitcoin (BTC) futures trading, launched on September 23.

Conceived by the global trading giant Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) and counting a solid portfolio of investors from Microsoft’s venture fund M12 to Starbucks as its backers, Bakkt offers institutional traders something brand new. The platform’s value proposition is physically-settled BTC futures contracts, combined with a sound custodial service approved by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Assuming that it is digital assets’ volatility and lack of regulatory safeguards that deters otherwise highly interested institutional investors from going big on BTC, Bakkt’s debut is a major milestone on the timeline of crypto adoption – and many in the space anticipated its debut with great excitement. However, as the first week of operation is coming to a close, the trading volumes on the platform remain meager.

Worse luck, Bakkt’s launch coincided with an immense slump in Bitcoin’s market price, leading some analysts to suspect a causal connection between the two. Does the underwhelming kickoff signify an early end to Bakkt’s aspirations of becoming a gateway for widespread, institutional adoption of crypto?

Bitcoin meets regulation in Bakkt futures
The Intercontinental Exchange is a U.S. enterprise headquartered in Atlanta that operates a dozen major regulated exchanges and marketplaces around the world, including the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and ICE Futures Europe. In August 2018, ICE announced its plans to create a Bitcoin futures marketplace fully compliant with CFTC regulations, looking to launch it at the end of that year.

Unlike the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) Bitcoin futures contracts that have been on the market since December 2017, the idea behind Bakkt is to create an instrument that would settle in actual Bitcoin upon liquidation. Whereas the value of a CME contract is delivered in cash equivalent and matched to the spot-market-based BTC price index at the time of expiration, owners of Bakkt futures get “physical” Bitcoin sent to their custodial account.

This modification could be seen as a step toward enhancing investors’ confidence in the new asset class. Presumably, as traders come to feel more serious about Bitcoin and its potential, they would prefer exposure to the actual coin rather than engaging with an instrument whose connection to the underlying asset is purely nominal.

Winning this edge over the competition, though, invoked the need for an additional operational layer: reliable custody. It would be too long of a shot to expect that conservative institutional investors would line up to buy a nebulous asset that they didn’t know how to handle safely.

This approach was bound to create additional red tape for its proponents, as it required going the extra mile to clear regulators’ rigorous requirements for entities that seek to operate as crypto custodians. Negotiations with the CFTC centered on the custodial issue stalled and dragged for several more months than ICE had initially planned.

It wasn’t until June 2019 that Bakkt secured the CFTC’s approval. Finally, on August 13, Bakkt Trust Co., the platform’s clearinghouse, obtained a charter from the New York State Department of Financial Services to operate as a custodian, marking the end of the platform’s regulatory quest.

On the day of its launch, Bakkt offered traders two types of derivatives: daily contracts, whose buyers receive their Bitcoin at the end of the same day — almost as if trading on a spot exchange — and monthly contracts, which ICE management hopes to be instrumental in longer-term BTC price discovery.

Unimpressive debut
Amid overall high expectations further fueled by crypto Twitter and media hype, Bakkt failed to impress on the first day of trading, with a paltry 71 contracts sold and the volume picking up slowly in the following days. To make matters worse, the day after launch, Bitcoin price took its largest intraday hit since January, losing some 13% within Tuesday.


                                   Bitcoin price declines by 13% in one day. Source: Coin360.com

Some observers were quick to suggest that Bakkt’s slow showing was to blame. Mati Greenspan, senior market analyst at digital asset trading platform eToro, told Barron’s: “The catalyst for today’s plunge, in my mind, seems to be the underwhelming launch of Bakkt. This is a prime example of “buy the rumor, sell the news.”

Others pointed out the glaring difference between Bakkt’s 71 first-day deals and CME’s 5298 trades in the first 24 hours. There was also something ominously similar between the two premieres: the day after CME futures became available, Bitcoin price took a tumble from around $19,000 to below $17,000.

In the big picture, skeptics may be tempted to conclude that such a lackluster performance of a much-anticipated regulated platform indicates the real level of interest that institutional investors have for crypto assets, and that the drop was induced after market participants suddenly realized the big money is not coming all at once.

Bigger picture
It is quite possible that the situation is less unequivocal, however. For one, the comparison between Bakkt’s debut and that of CME’s futures is not really appropriate. Derivatives offered by the Chicago exchange hit the markets at the very peak of the December 2017 crypto craze, following a months-long race of price inflation.

Bakkt opened business within a much more sober and stable market. Furthermore, it is not just the overall crypto market, but the crypto futures market that has dramatically transformed, having become much tighter. Alex Lam, CEO and co-founder of digital asset services platform RockX, shared his observation with Cointelegraph:
   “While its launch was a highly anticipated milestone for both Bakkt and the wider crypto community, its lacklustre reception attests to
   the highly competitive market and the current barriers to mass entry.”

A popular demand for BTC derivatives trading is well-served by a number of unregulated platforms, which still host the bulk of the volume. Marketplaces such as BitMEX and OKEx enjoy high liquidity and offer traders leverage of up to 100:1. Christophe de Courson, CEO of blockchain asset management fund Olymp Capital, told Cointelegraph:
   “Since the launch of Bakkt Bitcoin futures, the intraday volume has stayed between 70 to 100 BTC which, indeed, is small when
   compared to BitMEX, an unregulated exchange, with more than 270,000 BTC intraday volume on September 23rd 2019. However, it
   is noteworthy that regulated platforms generally have a smoother launch in comparison with crypto native platforms.”

Most of the experts who have spoken to Cointelegraph on this matter agree that, given this retail-driven character of crypto trading, it is unlikely that institution-oriented ventures like Bakkt will be exerting significant influence on the overall BTC market in the near future. Fran Strajnar, Founder and CEO of cryptocurrency research firm Brave New Coin, said:
   “Bitcoin and crypto trading remains a retail-led phenomenon. Accessible products available on platforms like Bitmex, and spot
   exchanges like Binance, are likely to continue to drive volume in the near term.”

The recent price drop could be partly driven by the reaction to Bakkt’s initial performance, but the effect should not persist for too long if it is indeed the key driver behind the observed movement.

Other developments of the week could have also contributed to plummeting prices, most notably, the inexplicable drop in BTC network’s hash rate soon after the start of futures trading. The incident still leaves many questions unanswered, as the popular explanation — that Kyrgyzstan suddenly cut off electricity to dozens of crypto mining entities at once — doesn’t seem to be compelling.

Curbing expectations
Even if Bakkt’s “physical” delivery is indeed a major competitive advantage that should entice investors at higher rates compared to cash settlement, it is barely enough to override institutional inertia that underlies traditional asset managers and funds’ reluctance to rush to the gate immediately. Tom Maxon, Head of U.S. Operations at the blockchain security company CoolBitX, said:
   “When it comes to institutional investors, Bakkt’s move will probably not make much of an impact to the price of Bitcoin at first. This
   is because Bakkt’s product faces two major obstacles: one, Bitcoin is still too unpredictable for institutional investors, and two,
   institutional funds’ board of directors will continue to perceive Bitcoin as a risky asset and fund managers will face an uphill battle to
   include this asset within their portfolio due to fiduciary duty. […] If conservative institutions have taken this long to invest in legal
   cannabis, they’re certainly going to take a long time to tolerate Bitcoin.”

Attracting big money to Bakkt’s new playground will likely be an incremental process, as many of the experts who have spoken to Cointelegraph on the matter admit. Jonathan Speigner, Founder and CEO of the crypto wallet company Coin.Space, noted to Cointelegraph:
   “The main reason the volume is low is they just do not have the customer base yet, it will more than likely take several more months
   before they see broader institutional customers using the platform. Remember institutional money has always been skeptical of
   Bitcoin.”

Brave New Coin’s Fran Strajnar was also willing to give Bakkt more time to prove its worth as Bakkt is likely to evolve into a gateway that will capture today’s suppressed demand for crypto trading vehicles within the institutional investment space. Strajnar added that, “This demand will take time to materialize. It’s too early to conclude that Bakkt is a failed product based on tepid demand in its first few days of trading.”

Most industry experts were also willing to commend Bakkt for bringing a unique product to the market, which, in Tom Maxon’s words, is a “bold step towards the future of Bitcoin products.” Bill Shihara, CEO of cryptocurrency trading platform Bittrex, said in a statement for Cointelegraph:
   “Bakkt’s regulated futures market is an exciting moment that marks how far the blockchain industry has come. These types of
   markets take time to build and reach to institutional traders, so a few days of trading isn’t representative of long term potential or
   performance. As an industry, this is a step in the right direction.”

Meanwhile, the busy market that Bakkt has just entered is poised to get even busier: CME has recently announced plans to supplement its futures contracts with options in early 2020, while up-and-coming competitors LedgerX and ErisX are getting closer to securing regulatory approval for launching their own physically delivered futures products. Along with the overall dynamics of investor interest for regulated crypto derivatives, we will soon have a chance to learn how different players in this field stack up against one another.


source:  https://cointelegraph.com/news/first-week-of-bakkt-slow-start-unlikely-to-dampen-long-term-prospects

Almost all traders are aware of the widely publicized statistic that “95% of traders lose money.” When you drill deeper, research implies that this number is likely higher. The profession chews up and spits out aspiring traders at an astounding rate.

So why are so many intelligent people drawn to a profession with incredibly high odds of failure?

6 striking stats showing traders have it rough
There are the obvious reasons — the appeal of working for yourself, sitting in your underwear on your couch all day making millions. There’s the (false) promise of “easy money” and the draw of independent wealth.

The truth is, day trading is extremely difficult, emotionally taxing and far more likely to destroy your life than enrich it.

Let’s start with a few key statistics, from online educational resource Tradeciety:

1.  80% of all day traders quit within the first two years;
2.  Among all day traders, nearly 40% day trade for only one month;
3.  Within three years, only 13% continue to day trade. After five years, only 7% remain;
4.  The average individual investor underperforms a market index by 1.5% per year;
5.  Active traders underperform by 6.5% annually;
6.  Traders with up to a 10 years negative track record continue to trade.

The last point suggests that day traders even continue to trade when they receive a negative signal regarding their ability.

Astounding. Almost everyone loses, they lose fast, they underperform simple, mindless investments, and they continue trading even after being proven unprofitable. Why?

The truth is, most would-be traders are woefully underprepared for the challenge ahead and learn many hard lessons with their real money. They underestimate the psychological challenges of trading and fail to eliminate emotion from their trades.

They fail to trade with a defined system. When they have a defined system, they often take trades outside of their own, established rules. These are all obvious reasons.

What is “random reinforcement”?
Perhaps a less notable reason that traders fail is the principle of “random reinforcement.” This concept also explains why they often continue trading, even after failing repeatedly. As defined by Investopedia, “Random Reinforcement” is:

 Using arbitrary events to qualify (or disqualify) a hypothesis or idea; attributing skill or lack of skill to an outcome that is unsystematic
 in nature; finding support for positive or negative behaviors from outcomes that are inconsistent in nature—like the financial markets.

The market has a tendency to reward bad habits, while concurrently punishing positive behaviors, especially with a small sample set. Let’s take a theoretical example to display this principal.

Bob wants to leave his job and become a crypto trader. He sets aside some starting capital, follows the markets and the “big names” on twitter. He sees them talking about an altcoin, opens the chart and sees that price is rising fast. He buys, goes to take a shower, returns and sells for a quick profit. He does this again before lunch and strings together a few successful trades. Bob starts to feel confident that he is a talented trader.

So what is the problem? Bob is trading without a system or a plan and is being fooled into believing that a successful outcome on a few random trades is indicative of likely success moving forward. The market has rewarded his bad behavior. We know how this story ends — Bob continues to make impulsive trades and eventually loses his capital.

There is a flip side to this coin. Let’s say that Bob learns his lesson and spends months developing a trading plan, complete with risk management, proper portfolio allocations and trading rules.

He identifies a trading opportunity that fits, takes the perfect entry and… stops out of his trade. He tries again. And again. He loses 7 times in a row. The market is punishing Bob for his good behavior. Bob starts to doubt his system and takes a high-risk trade that violates his system — and is successful. To his surprise, he tries this a second time and also makes money. Bob is now back to square one, trading without a system because the market has rewarded his bad behavior.

Through random reinforcement, the market has re-conditioned the way Bob approaches trading by distracting him away from his trading plan. He has allowed himself to be manipulated into an impulsive, high risk, revenge based trading approach.

Everyone was a genius in 2017
The concept of random reinforcement was never more evident than in the crypto bubble of 2017. During this parabolic bull market, it was easy to mistake luck for skill.

Amateur traders were making money hand over foot by simply throwing cash into random altcoins and selling after massive, immediate gains. Everyone was a “genius” in the 2017 crypto market. Then 2018 happened — the bubble popped, and these amateur traders were ill-prepared to deal with the drawdown. They failed to sell their assets and held blindly until they had lost everything.

Understanding that markets are dynamic and in constant flux is key to being profitable. A trader must learn to be able to determine when a certain string of losses or profits can be attributed to their skill and when it is random. This is done by trading with a defined plan over a long period of time.

Every trader should have a well developed and tested (through paper trading) plan, with written rules for entries, exits and stop losses, position sizing and risk. They should NEVER trade outside their plan.

Bitcoin trading: sticking to your plan
No more than 1% of a trader’s portfolio should be at risk on any single trade — this is the key to sustaining multiple, consecutive losses. They should test and tweak their plan over a long period of time — hundreds of trades. A good system gives a trader an edge over a long time frame because randomness becomes less of a factor with a larger sample.

A good trade should be defined as one where a trader planned their trade, traded their plan and managed their risk — those are all elements they can control. It is NOT defined by the outcome.

A bad trade, on the other hand, is where a trader fails to follow their rules and executes trades against their better judgment. This is always going to be a bad trade even if it happens to be profitable.

By developing a well-tested plan, traders can overcome the pitfalls of random reinforcement, eliminate emotion and impulse, and learn to be profitable. That’s how you become a part of the 5% that make it as traders.


source:  https://cointelegraph.com/news/day-trading-bitcoin-why-95-of-traders-lose-money-and-fail

Indian automobile manufacturer Tata Motors wants to integrate blockchain solutions into its internal processes as part of a newly launched program for startups.

As Business Insider India reported on Sept. 18, Tata Motors has rolled out a program for startups dubbed “Tata Motors AutoMobility Collaboration Network 2.0,” through which it intends to develop a range of industry-related products, including artificial intelligence and blockchain-enabled solutions.

The firm wants to apply blockchain-based solutions in various aspects of the automotive industry, including parking marketplace, demand prediction algorithm and real-time monitoring of fuel quality.

Commenting on the initiative, Shailesh Chandra, president of electric mobility business and corporate strategy at Tata Motors, said:
     “Today, almost every segment of the automotive value-chain is required to drive its own innovation story. [...] In the current age of
     uncertainty and speed of change, the above effort of sourcing solutions will need to be driven both through in-house initiatives as
     well as collaborating with external partners.”

Blockchain recognition by car industry leaders
Blockchain has seen wide adoption in the automotive industry, with some of the world’s leading car manufacturers having already embraced it. In late August, blockchain solutions company PlatOn created a platform for storing data and calculating the price of used business cars at Beijing Mercedes-Benz Sales Service.

That same month, Volvo Cars, owned by Chinese automotive group Geely, produced electric cars with cobalt mapped on a blockchain, purportedly aiming to prove that their electric vehicles do not rely on conflict minerals or child labor.

As Cointelegraph previously reported, the blockchain devices market will purportedly see a 42.5% compound annual growth rate in coming years, to reach a valuation of $1.285 billion in 2024. In comparison, the value of the market in 2019 has reportedly amounted to $218 million to date.


source:  https://cointelegraph.com/news/indian-car-manufacturer-tata-motors-calls-for-automotive-blockchain-tech