Bitcoin hit $2338.10 officially on the dinbits index while ZCash has risen over $275 in recent days. There are several digital assets that have also ignited including Gnosis, Litecoin, and Dash among others.

Dash is at $144, while Gnosis is commanding over $200 per coin. Some other impressive movements on assets include Litecoin (LTC) $30.87, Ethereum (ETH) at  $178.00, Monero (XMR) at $53.25, and Ethereum Classic (ETC ) where Ethereum was just a few months ago at $13.37.

The bad boy however, is the most impressive. Bitcoin. The digital asset that started this entire industry is trading at a market rate of as high as $2,338.10 (the new all-time high) which some may believe is a "bubble" but bitcoin is actually at a lower market rate than most expected it to be currently and what many say is undervalued.

In 2014/2015 bitcoin took a devastating blow with Mt. Gox and other exchanges failing and casting a shadow of doubt over bitcoin and the industry as a whole. Bitcoin would then drop to under $200 before finally starting a slow but somewhat steady and stable recovery.

We forecast in January that bitcoin would meet or exceed $2,500 by September 2017. Here we are about to enter June, just 3 months away, and bitcoin is at $2,300 with no signs of letting up. Some have forecast a market value of $3500 or more by year end.

We're not ready to call that one yet but we'll make our call and prediction come June after where half way through the year.

One thing that is apparent, our prediction of $2500 is likely going to happen on or before September. What's not so transparent are the other digital assets becoming so valuable so fast like Gnosis and ZCash. ZCash got a boost from the JPMorgan partnership but Gnosis is brand new. It's always recommended advice to approach investing with extreme caution when dealing with new assets, however Gnosis it one of the good ones from the looks of things.

These are all nice problems to have and here's a couple facts to ponder, bitcoin's market capitalization is currently at an astonishing $39 billion and digital assets overall are at $87 billion.

Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by staff

The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of or its affiliates.

Don't look now but bitcoin not only shattered an all time high hitting $1628.95 on the dinbits index and it's been holding steady at over $1500 for several days after some monstrous profit taking. 

In the last 12 hour session bitcoin has once again risen above $1600, currently at $1618.76 bitcoin has continued to rise this year since it broke the $1000 plane for the on January 1st.

Not Just Bitcoin Anymore

Bitcoin isn't alone in its surge. Ether (ETH), ZCash (ZEC), and Dash (DSH/DASH/DRK) are all right around or above the $100 mark. With others like Litecoin (LTC), Monero (XRM), and Ether Classic (ETC) also doing well there's one seemingly clear point, digital assets with utility and privacy are the most popular kind.

Litecoin may be a payment token in it's purpose, but it's integration of Segwit has been a motivating factor for it's recent rise. Ether and Ether Classic both facilitate easier (than bitcoin) development of smart contracts and Monero, Dash, and ZCash all offer additional privacy.

All of these assets, in addition to bitcoin, are on the rise and seeing record highs.

When altcoins do well it's good for both the altcoin and for bitcoin. Often there is talk of new coin overthrowing bitcoin and altcoin supporters promoting their coin with its superiority over bitcoin or calling others ""bitcoin maximalist".

There are certainly people that exist on earth that believe there should only be the bitcoin blockchain, but the term "bitcoin maximalist" is rather misguided encompassing just about everything negative said about other networks as a "bitcoin maximalist" approach and this simply isn't true.

The reason many, included, are vocal on this topic and it's not because they want only bitcoin to be successful, bitcoin is already successful, it is because they don't want others to think they are getting the power, security and immutability that comes with the bitcoin blockchain with everything called a block-chain. It's also not because they don't want to see other networks succeed, they actually want this to happen because it's good for bitcoin. They want people to understand new networks can be dangerous and private networks simply cannot ever be 100% safe because it is technically impossible for it to be so. 

A new network is not secure nor is it tamper-resistant and although it may intend to be immutable, it simply cannot be until it reaches a certain maturity level. 

It is improbable that private networks never can reach this level and what many so-called "maximalists" are really talking about. 

Regardless of any of that, the good news is that Dash, Ether, Ether Classic, ZCash, and Litecoin among others are on the up and that is good for bitcoin and altcoins. Bitcoin is over $1500 and that is good for bitcoin.... and altcoins.

Being an investor in digital currency these days certainly doesn't suck.

Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by staff

The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of or its affiliates.

There's a large spread across digital currency exchanges and the market prices are all over the map. 

As of 7am, April 29th (UTC time)  BTC-e is reporting $1295.40, OKCoin is reporting $1256.48, and Quoine is reporting $1318.50.

That's an average of about $1290.13 USD.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, Bitfinex is reporting $1422, GDAX is reporting $1356.48, and both Gemini and Kraken are reporting around $1340 for an average of around $1364.62 USD.

That's a $74.49 variance between the upper level and lower level market prices. 

The overall dinbits index is officially reporting at $1346.21 which is $89.73 over the lowest exchange report (OKCoin, $1256.48) and $75.79 under the highest exchange report (Bitfinex, $1422) which almost makes cross-trading worth a shot.

What is Cross-trading?

Cross-trading is the process of buying from one exchange and selling on another exchange. For example, one may opt to buy on Bitstamp at it's current rate of $1330.94 and then sell on GDAX at $1356.38 for an immediate return of $25.79 per coin. 

The best current cross-trade would be from OKCoin at $1256.48 to Bitfinex at $1422 which would yield a return of $165.52 USD.

If you include P2P trading platforms such as Remitano, Paxful, Localbitcoins, etc... the gain can increase. Buying on OKCoin ($1256.48) and selling on Localbitcoins ($1556.39) would bring a profit of $299.91 per coin.

Both examples bring incredible returns. However .... cross-trading doesn't work that well in reality. You have to calculate the trading fees, withdraw fees, and the time between sending coins from one location to another. There may be a $10 spread between exchanges but by the time you double the fees, send through this blockchain which can take hours at times, and get someone on the target exchange to buy you coin, it's more plausible than not, that your $10 spread is gone or worse. In fact it could very well end up that the target exchange is then selling at a market rate less-than that of the exchange, of origin.

Another issue is that selling on Bitfinex might become problematic if you wish to do any profit-taking in USD since they continue, as does OKCoin, to have issues with withdraws as banks in the United States have been reportedly blocking transactions of this nature.

P2P (peer-to-peer) platforms make this more possible such as Localbitcoins, however, that takes much more skill patience and in many jurisdictions, licensing and registration since when you enter this realm of trade you are dealing with buyers directly in an OTC (over-the-counter) manner and are no longer under a custodial or investment "umbrella" and are responsible for upholding the regulation of the jurisdiction you are in, or selling to, on your own. 

The risk is also much higher for the exact same reasons. Without custodial protection you're prone to scams and being responsible for the regulatory requirements of those governing these types of transactions where you reside, or where you're selling, can land you in legal trouble or even facing criminal charges if not handled properly. 

There's a reason professionals doing this make the kind of money they do. Regulatory compliance and fraud prevention are not cheap and whereas compliance with regulations can help eliminate legal problems, fraud prevention programs and software only increase your odds for success. The risk remains high. 

That said, buying on Bitstamp and selling on GDAX still would return a gain and proposes less risk. With the current spreads, this is plausible. However a million things can go wrong, I remember a bot back in 2013 that did this very thing and it didn't do so well for many reasons. The main one being the time between trade A and trade B on blockchain C and that was 5 years ago when the blockchain actually worked

Still ... it is tempting to consider again, these spread wasn't as wide as they exist currently nor were the prices as stable as they are these days.

dinbits Index

Currently Bitfinex remains on our index however it alone doesn't affect the index more and a few dollars. 

That said, we are not weighting the Bitfinex volume. We've heard reports of some platforms having removed Bitfinex completely, however have been able to confirm only one website (bitcoinaverage) that has actually done this. Tradeblock is not weighting Bitfinex's volume (as dinbits is not) in its index but still including it in factoring the market rate. Tradeblock removed OKCoin completely from it's index earlier this year. 

Our position on this is that if a bitcoin is sold and the proceeds from that sale can be realized and vice-versa, then the exchange of that bitcoin counts for the value of medium in which it was exchanged for. This is why BTC-e remains on the index despite their consistently lower market rate and the same principal is applicable to Bitfinex with limited volume weighting. The restriction on the volume is due to the inability to fully realize the ROI without the ability to withdraw USD funds. 

Volumes may not be accurate since users have to buy back bitcoin to move funds anywhere and this could certainly be affecting both the volume and price. Bitfinex remain on the index and continue to be record by the minute, it just won't be weighted.

Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by staff

The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of or its affiliates.

Hawaii, where Coinbase recently withdrew services, has added language to a bill that would exempt virtual currency businesses from it's money transmission laws.

Senate Bill 949 clarifies that decentralized virtual currency activities would not be subject to the Money Transmitters Act.

The bill adds a definition of virtual currency as:

"Decentralized virtual currency" means a medium of exchange that:
     (1)  Does not have legal tender status in any jurisdiction;
     (2)  Does not have a central repository or single administrator;
     (3)  May act as a substitute for, have an equivalent value in, or be converted to or exchanged for legal tender in at least one jurisdiction world-wide;
     (4)  Is electronically transmitted between parties without an intermediary; and
     (5)  Relies on cryptographic software protocols for currency generation and validation of transactions.
The bill then adds two very important amendments. The first being under the definition of "payment instruments" which states virtual currency would not be applicable. It currently reads:

 The term "payment instrument" does not include any credit card voucher, any letter of credit, [or] any instrument that is redeemable by the issuer in goods or services.

The amendment would revise the following:

 The term "payment instrument" does not include any credit card voucher, any letter of credit, [or] any instrument that is redeemable by the issuer in goods or services, or any instrument or order for the transmission, sale, or payment of decentralized virtual currency."

The second amendment of note is the exemptions from money transmission licensing requirements in  Section 489D-5(a):

(a)  This chapter shall not apply to:     (1)  The United States or any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof;     (2)  The United States Postal Service;     (3)  The State or any political subdivisions thereof;      (4)  The electronic transfer of government benefits for any federal, state, or county governmental agency as defined in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation E, by a contractor for, and on behalf of the United States or any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, or any state or any political subdivisions thereof; and     (5)  The sale, receipt, storage, or transfer of decentralized virtual currency; provided that this paragraph shall not affect the status or any obligation under federal law of any person that engages in any transaction or activity involving decentralized virtual currency.

According to the latter, "storage" or "transfer" would not be covered giving Coinbase, and others, a full pass to engage the state in virtual currency transactions.

Like North Carolina, federal MSB registration requirements would still be required, however state licensing would no longer be. In Texas fashion Hawaii would not restrict exchanges, miners, and wallets either making it among the friendliest states in the United States if approved.

Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by staff

The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of or its affiliates.

New Hampshire may be among the bitcoin friendly states again soon, House Bill 436, a bill which amends the states money transmission laws, was past by the New Hampshire senate and now moves to Governor Chris Sununu's office for approval.

If the bill is signed by Governor Sununu, the law would go into affect around June 26th. The Governor has 5 days (excluding Sunday) to review and consider the amendments during which time he can veto or sign the bill.

The bill also a definition of virtual currency to read:

“Virtual currency” means a digital representation of value that can be digitally traded and functions as a medium of exchange, a unit of account, or a store of value but does not have legal tender status as recognized by the United States government.

This bill additionally amends RSA 399-G:3, VII (exemptions) to read:

Persons conducting business using transactions conducted in whole or in part in virtual currency

Which if passed, will give New Hampshire virtual currency businesses an exemption from the requirement of a state money transmitters license.

However,  it doesn't give a pass to all businesses. New Hampshire is looking to adopt the North Carolina approach to virtual currency regulation. The bill also amends RSA 399-G:1, XVI(b), which is the definition of money transmission, to read:  

XVI. "Money transmission'' means:        (a) Engaging in the business of selling or issuing payment instruments or stored      value; or        (b) Receiving currency or monetary value for transmission to another location, including maintaining control of virtual currency on behalf of others.

Thus, some ATM models, exchanges, mining companies, wallet services, etc... are certainly affected and may still require a license. The term maintaining control is rather broad and could lead to some potential issues with other services as well.

This is very similar to the current law in North Carolina.

Regardless, this is a step in the right direction and should be positive for most concerned parties over the prohibitive law that went into affect on January 1st 2016 restricting virtual currency transactions.

An approval (or veto) is expected on April 26th.

Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by staff

The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of or its affiliates.

Bitfinex and OKCoin have both frozen US wire transfers over the last few days. This coming after continue banking issues with the United States.

Earlier this month Bitfinex withdrew a lawsuit it had against Well Fargo for not completing outbound wire transfers and OKCoin has asked it's users in the US to stop making deposits from United States based bank accounts.

United States Banks

United States banks continue to exaggerate US regulation using it as an excuse to turn away business they feel is in the slightest way a risk to their bottom line. Which is fair enough, it's a free country and they can refuse service to anyone they feel like. However at least call apples, apples and just flat out state "NO DIGITAL ASSET BUSINESS ALLOWED". What's so damn hard about that? 

Oh yeah, they can't. They want some business, just not others, so they just keep letting businesses and consumers walk into a potential mousetrap where funds expected to arrive on the same day end up frozen in transition. 

It's just another example of why bitcoin exists in the first place. Banks used to just shrug off bitcoin and it's been declared dead about 150 times, primarily by financial or competing entities. These days, not as much, it's a blip on their radar they are cognizant of despite the seemingly tranquil position commonly presented. 

The international exchanges are not alone, Kraken, Coinbase (GDAX), Gemini, itBit and many others have had issues with banks and/or their users have had problems despite their regulated and licensed status.    

Neither Bitfinex or OKcoin have given a time frame in which wires will be restored if ever and United States resident users already cannot participate in other Bitfinex functionality.

Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by staff

The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of or its affiliates.

Ethbits has announced it's ICO. 

First, let's address the elephant in the room. What the hell is going on with the Pacman ghost in their logo? I thought it was just me but here's one of our artists renditions of Pacman and ghosts using the actual logo from Ethbits.

I mean, the worlds greatest judge of comparing old video game icons to modern day logos I may not be, but this looks pretty much looks like a carbon copy. 

In any case ....

The Pitch

The new project plans to build another altcoin exchange similar to Localbitcoins for OTC style trades. Which is what other sites like PoloniexBTCPop, and others so with altcoin and what is actually done on Localbitcoins for that matter.

They plan to begin a crowdsale starting on April 15th. .

“LocalBitcoins allows users to buy bitcoins without a bank account, but we are moving into alternative currencies to cater for the growing movement into crypto.” - Pravjit Singh, Director, Founder & CEO, 

Ethbits local will launch immediately after funding they say. Which is a bit concerning, if this is already built, what do they need a crowdfunding for?

Not developers for obvious reasons.
Not for tokens because as they state, this will be bringing others together for BUY/SELL.
Not for support, they should have this covered else they don't believe their own product will support their payroll.

Just things to be cognizant of.

Concerns About This Investment

The platforms token [insert record scratch here] ...

This is where the concern grown into suspicion and interest retreats into a pass of this opportunity.

We've heard crap like this a million times over. It never pans out, remember Paycoin? We heard the same stuff from Garza (of Gaw Miners).

The immediate concern is exactly how are these "tokens" to be purchased from ethbits? I have a sick feeling the answer is going to be: bitcoin.

Here's the problem with this, to buy into this scheme I assume requires bitcoin (or another coin of actual value). This means you're pretty much married to this coins until 2018 when "iTrade" actually starts working.

Then there's the copyright infringement. If these guys think the are going to run around getting investment money and selling their coins on a platform called "iTrade" they have another realization waiting for them when Scotia Bank finds out. Scotia owns the name iTrade and it's a registered trademark. They also own the domain They are in the financial industry and obviously their platform does the exact same thing, allow trading assets and investments.

Any lawyer in any country would take one look at this and spell out "B A D" followed by "I D E A" and make you write this on the chalk board 1000 times.

Moreover the damages are already done, with this announcement, Scotia already has a case if they were to choose to pursue and I would guess this is already on somebody's radar somewhere.

Anytime you use a trademark, especially in a similar or the same industry, of someone else's who's brand they have worked to promote  and spent money, time, and resources on, you are simply asking for allot of trouble. National laws and international treaties protect these brands for this exact reason else every store would be called Walmart and every soda would be called Coke and consumers everywhere would never have a clue what product they are choosing.

Its essentially the same problem software companies created with the term "blockchain technology". Blockchain technology up until a year or so ago meant bitcoins network and the immutable security that only it can provide. Now it doesn't mean anything because companies are calling anything and everything they can "blockcolor"a block-chain.

Not that I really care about copyright infringement, I don't. However, it shows a lack of diligence and that's why it's a bit of a concern.

Additionally things like profits based on follows reeks of an MLM scheme.

Traders who work in our platform have the opportunity of earning a percentage of their follower’s profit and obtain power-ups to gain certain privileges, such as reduced fees." - EhtBits CEO said. 

We'll chalk that up to an incentive program and try to leave it alone. There's allot of those in this industry. What's also abundant in this industry are platform where traders can do what Ethbits proposes however on these platform's traders are not limited to unknown tokens of no value to pay for things.

They further disclose more things to be concerned about in that they plan on opening offices all over the world in 6 different countries and hire a full legal team for compliance. The biggest take away there is that they "plan" to hire a legal team. This isn't a real shocker since it's rather apparent from their statements made that they don't have one currently.

So after careful review and consideration, I myself will have to pass on this opportunity, the copyright infringement alone killed it for me, but there are many concerns so even if that weren't the case, I would still pass.

However, you may not value your bitcoin as much and would like to take the risk. If that's the case you can learn more about Ethbits on their website.

Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by staff

The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of or its affiliates.

Be wary of the Twitter account BTCP0P. No not BTCPop, they're good people. It's BTCP0P that's the impostor.

It appears as if they are making an attempt to trick people into sending coins to an address almost certainly not own by BTCPop.

Confused? Let's look at this more closely.

Here's the actual URL of the twitter account of BTCPop, the P2P loan and trading platform.

Here's the impostor:

Other than the missing "CO" at the end of the authentic account it's hard to tell who's for real. Until you lower case the URL.

Then compare:



Tricks to Uncover Common Impostor Strategies

Using numbers or letters to look like other numbers or letters is a common practice and to the unsuspecting eye this almost always lures in actual users to a given platform. Here's  few to watch out for:





  1. In the first example (this articles original subject) there's simply a 0 used instead of an 0. This is a dead give away if you change the case.
  2. Localbitcoins with a 1 serving as an I, hard to detect when the username is UPPERCASE, however easy to spot once the case s toggled.
  3. Coinbase has a lowercase l along with UPPERCASE letter thus resembling an uppercase i. Case toggle reveals this one in both directions but be careful here because the entire case of the string must be changed.
  4. Same example the third, this time with bitstamp.
  5. The 5-6 examples are rather tricky and depending on what system and/or software you're using it may be difficult to detect. In this example a subscript 1 or L (lower) is used for an i, at a glance it looks right. Double toggle the case or unify the size to reveal.
  6. The last example is not easily detectable outside of paying attention or counting the characters. In this example there's a subscript period at the end of the username which looks more like a spec on the screen. 

These are just a few techniques to watch out for. Always be aware of who it is you're actually dealing with.

About BTCPop

BTCPop is a P2P lending, IPO, and trading platform, you can learn more about there on their website. It's a great way to get a crowdfunded loan, IPO, or exchange various digital currencies with peers. Check them out.

Visit BTCPop

Be careful out there!

Article by dinbits
Image Credits:
Banner Image by staff

Twitter, MaineBitoin

The opinions expressed by authors of articles linked, referenced, or published on do not necessarily express, nor are endorsed by, the opinions the of or its affiliates.

Powered by Blogger.