Connect with us

Ethereum

Ethereum [ETH] and Ethereum Classic [ETC] to be added to BTC.com’s list of mining pools

Shahrain KM

Published

on

Ethereum [ETH] and Ethereum Classic [ETC] to be added to BTC.com list of mining pools
Source: Pixabay

On 30th August, BTC.com, a web wallet owned by Bitmain Technologies announced that they have added Ethereum [ETH] and Ethereum Classic [ETC] mining pools to their platform. The announcement was made despite the fact that Ethereum has seen a downward spiral in price this year.

According to BTC.com, the move was made to spread their mining portfolio. The web wallet has confirmed that 21% of all the newly mined Bitcoin were produced by them in the past year. Zhuang Zhong, the Director of BTC.com stated that the platform is also working on adding Monero [XMR] to their mining pool.

Currently, Bitmain is said to be the world’s first consumer-grade 16nm ASIC miner and one of the most efficient Bitcoin miners. Earlier this year, Bitmain had released their first Ethereum-based ASIC [Application-Specific Integrated Circuit], an integrated circuit that is customized for a specific purpose. Now, the new mining pools are set to comprise of GPU [Graphics Processing Unit] and CPU mining options as well.

BTC.com alleges that they are one of the largest Bitcoin Cash BCH miners at present. The website is known for performing 16% of the total Bitcoin hash rate [computing power]. Zhuang said:

“We’ve had a lot of customer requests for Ethereum support this year, so it was a clear choice for us,”

He further added:

“By competing to provide the best reward margins along with our product development, we expect mining operations to grow to 12% of ETH total hash rate in the next 12 months.”

Twitter user, GitsummBtc commented:

“It doesn’t get any worse than this. Why would anyone own this coin?”

Another user, CryptoScottyb added:

“When will the Ethereum and Ethereum Classic mining pools be live?”

Redditor named Benefit420 said:

“Yeah, no I’m good. I would literally rather use anything besides Bitmain.”

Another Redditor, Chescos stated:

“This is great news. It’s always good to have more options!”

At present, Bitmain is all set for their IPO [Initial Public Offering] which could value the company to about $50 billion which is a big deal for the platform. Nevertheless, the platform has been under fire after Samson Mow, the Chief Strategy Officer of Blockstream, a blockchain firm exposed Bitmain for suspicious activities. This has lead pre-IPO investors to opt out of the deal.





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter




Follow us on Telegram | Twitter | Facebook



Shahrain KM is a writer at AMB Crypto. Her curiosity in Blockchain technology and Cryptocurrencies has led her to be a part of the news reporting team of AMB Crypto. She does not hold value in any cryptocurrencies currently.

News

Coin Metrics data reveals inaccuracies in Kik’s claim of being as dominant as BTC, ETH blockchains

Avatar

Published

on

Source: Pixabay

Upon investigating Kik’s claims in response to SEC’s lawsuit filed earlier this month, CoinMetric data reported inconsistencies in the on-chain activity and adoption rate of its native token, Kin.

In a study dubbed, “An Analysis of Kin’s On-Chain Activity,” the crypto-asset elaborated on the two assertions made by Kik in its letter to the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

Kik’s first claim was regarding its blockchain activity. Its in-house token, Kin, supposedly exceeded Ether and Bitcoin to record the fifth highest daily blockchain activity. This was debunked by CoinMetric’s investigation after taking into account its “Operation Count” [the same metric used by Kik to support their claim] and “Transfer Value.”

In terms of the Operation Count, the report explained,

“According to Kik’s source for the metric, “blockchain activity” is defined as “the number of operations on the blockchain in the last 24 hours.” Operations are broadly defined as any type of action that could be recorded on chain. But operations are not standardized across blockchains which makes comparing across chains difficult.”

Besides, drawing parallel comparisons across blockchains with radically different use cases and operations is difficult.

Although Kik’s original research showed a high number of account creations, Coin Metrics data revealed that many of these accounts were empty.

Additionally, Kin’s “create account” operation has a fee of .001 Kin. The report highlighted that a metric such as “operations count” for the purpose of blockchain activity cannot be used as a measurement tool since Bitcoin and Ethereum blockchains do not track account creations on-chain.

In terms of Transfer of Value, the report elaborated,

“Theoretically, high daily transfer value should signify high activity. But transfer value is often quite noisy, especially on low fee blockchains where there are minimal costs to sending transactions. Some transfers might simply be users moving money around between addresses they own”

Instead, Coin Metrics contrived “adjusted transfer value” metric to eliminate what it called, “noise and certain artifacts like self-sends, or deliberate spammy behavior.” Coin Metric noted that this gives a clearer picture of the on-chain activity, resulting in a decreased transfer value when compared to other blockchains, even if it had a high number of daily blockchain operations.

Additionally, Kin’s average transaction value was also low, when compared to other blockchains. For the first claim, Coin Metrics concluded that the Kin platform had more micro-transactions than Bitcoin and other dominant blockchains, while highlighting the fact that the latter blockchains are not primarily used for such transactions.

Regarding Kik’s second claim that said that over 300,000 users were earning and spending Kin as a currency, Coin Metrics assessed its blockchain usage. The number of addresses is not necessarily equal to the number of users since a single user could have multiple addresses. Hence, Coin Metrics took the number of active users into account, which the report defined as “the number of unique addresses that were active in the network [either as a recipient or originator of a ledger change] during that day.” The report noted,

“Kin 2 has significantly more originating active addresses than Kin 3. Although Kin is in the process of migrating to Kin 3, it appears that Kik is using data from the Kin 2 chain to support their claims about usage.”

Further, Kin 2 and Kin 3 had more active addresses that received payments than originated payments, which meant that there were more “earners” on Kin than “spenders,” also noting that only 35,000 addresses held over 10,000 kin [nearly $0.23]. The report added that the figures are lower than other blockchains which have a minimum of 1,000,000 addresses with at least $1.

After examining multiple critical aspects, Coin Metrics concluded that Kin fell below dominant blockchains in terms of daily active addresses, despite maintaining steady growth. It said,

“A majority of Kin’s active addresses have small account balances. While this makes sense for a network built around micropayments, when viewed across multiple metrics, our data show that Kin is not more widely used than dominant chains such as Bitcoin or Ethereum.”





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter


Continue Reading