Ledger trade journal publishes first issue

The issue contains 10 peer-review papers including a probabilistic analysis of the NXT “Forging Algorithm”, questions of blockchain governance and theories on social contracts. The publication was formally announced last year. They wanted to give the industry a greater incentive to participate, so they decided to create a platform on which scientists of digital currencies could publish their studies in full length.

The first issue of the news spy has been published

According to the people involved, it took a little longer. The reason was the formalization of the review process. Now that the first publication of the first issue has been completed, the editors are planning a complete publication twice a year and additional articles on the side.

Christopher Wilmer, deputy managing director and principal investigator of the University of Pittsburgh, explained CoinDesk:

“There is growing interest and activity among scientists from Princeton, MIT, Duke, Cornell and a whole list of other universities researching crypto-currencies,” Wilmer said.

Academics to be involved in the crypto industry

Wilmer explained that there have been two main inspirations for the news spy this journal. On the one hand he wanted academics to be involved in the crypto industry and on the other hand he wanted to offer a common place where scientists (even those who want to remain pseudonymous) can share their work.

The publication is funded by the non-profit crypto currency group Coin Center, while the journal is distributed by the University Library System.

The publication accepts submissions in four categories, including scientific articles that are no longer than 4,000 words and reviews that summarize relevant research topics with no more than 6,000 words.

Before an article is published, journal staff insert a hash of the final manuscript into the Bitcoin blockchain. Authors are then encouraged to sign this hash with their public keys.

Embezzlement or securing? Battle over the match pool ICO

Funds worth about 1.500.000 EUR are said to have disappeared from Matchpool. A co-founder makes heavy accusations and leaves the project.

Some time ago we reported about the Matchpool ICO. The goal of the project is a blockchain-based Tinder app – dating on the blockchain. Specifically the basis for a kind of own dating application is to be laid, in which possible payments are regulated by Smart Contracts.

The project was financed by an ICO. Tokens called Guppy or GUP were sold via this ICO. The goal was to sell 60% of the existing Guppy tokens against ether in this Initial Coin Offer – a goal that was achieved very quickly. A certain demand in the community is therefore clearly visible.

Now, however, controversies arose

The CEO is accused of having stolen more than EUR 5 million from the Multisig account at ETH Zurich, which was connected with the discovery.

This unannounced coin movement confirms the concerns of those who have criticized Matchpool from the outset. Even more dramatic is that Philip Saunders, one of the co-founders, made this coin movement public and declared his withdrawal from the project.

Coin Movement for Security: Matchpool Explains Itself

In a blog post on Medium Yonatan Ben Shimon commented on the accusations and the quarrel with co-founders. Regarding the accusation of embezzlement of funds, reference is made to an earlier blog post in which Matchpool explained its risk management strategy: Since the volatility of Ethereum is higher than that of Bitcoin, it was considered sensible to invest part of the money in the more stable Bitcoin in order to hedge the funds. The Bitcoins acquired should be secured on a Trezor Cold Storage.

Regarding the exit of Philip Saunders, the view of Yonatan Ben Shimon is presented. According to him, Philip’s interest has waned. In addition, his work – apart from writing the white paper and implementing the necessary smart contracts – is said to have been rather inadequate, so they wanted to complement the team with more talented developers anyway.

According to Yonatan, after the ICO Philip Saunders wanted to retain his share of the funds he had acquired – which he was denied. This refusal finally led to the current drama about the withdrawal of a co-founder.

So we see that in the aftermath of the ICO there are different sides throwing dirt at a team in dispute. Funds were generally moved, but not in the aforementioned size. The reason is understandable that some people see some red flags here, especially with the money supply at stake – the history of the ICOs knows its scams.

However, the CEO deserves credit for quickly responding to the accusations and for pointing out that something had been planned to minimise the risk anyway. In any case, we will continue to monitor and report on the Matchpool case.