Connect with us

Altcoins

“Grin is intended to be medium-of-exchange, and Beam is intended to be for store-of-value”, says Mastering Bitcoin author

Priya

Published

on

"Grin is intended to be medium-of-exchange, and Beam is intended to be for store-of-value", says Mastering Bitcoin author
Source: Unsplash

During the recent Q&A session, Andreas Antonopoulos, the author of Mastering Bitcoin, elucidated on the difference between Grin and Beam, the two cryptocurrencies that are based on the same protocol – MimbleWimble. The protocol enables the coins to make transactions without disclosing information of the amount and addresses involved in the transaction.

According to the author, MimbleWimble makes space for the optimization of privacy and scaling at the same time. The protocol was introduced in 2016 by an anonymous contributor who goes by the French name of Lord Voldemort, Tom Elvis Jedusor. He said:

“Immediately, an effort was made to implement this. The first effort, which started two years ago, is an open-source community project called Grin. It is primarily research focused to bring MimbleWimble to life by creating an implementation.”

This was followed by Andreas stating that Grin is an open-source project and that it is crowdfunded. Additionally, the coin was not pre-mined and there was initial coin offering [ICO] and a financial model that would support the development of the project, apart from the volunteers of the cryptocurrency community.



Whereas, Beam was introduced a year later with a completely different mode. The author stated that there was a foundation behind Beam and the project also has a pay-out to the Treasury. Andreas further stated that this project attracted investments from Venture Capital firms and that there was an organization that funds for the development of the project.

“They have two different approaches [to governance]: one is a very grassroots, community development model that is mostly research search focus. The other one is more commercially oriented, intending to [create] a viable commercial product. Grin has a command-line interface [for Linux, OSX and Windows], which is not that easy to use. Beam has a full graphical user interface and mobile wallet, which is easier to use.”

He went on to say that both the projects have different monetary models; Grin issuing 60 new coins per minute in a linear, continuous issuance schedule. On the contrary, the Beam has a monetary policy that is similar to Bitcoin, a fixed supply.

“The way these are [each] advertised or described by those developing them is, Grin is intended to be medium-of-exchange, and Beam is intended to be for store-of-value […] Grin and Beam are both open-source. Initially, Beam was not open-source, but they are now both open-source and exchanging code, learning from each other.”





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter




Follow us on Telegram | Twitter | Facebook



Priya is a full-time member of the reporting team at AMBCrypto. She is a finance major with one year of writing experience. She has not held any value in Bitcoin or other currencies.

Bitcoin

Bitcoin’s [BTC] biggest threat is its users, not governments, says Bitcoin.org’s Cobra

Febin Jose

Published

on

Bitcoin’s [BTC] biggest threat is its users, not governments, says Bitcoin.org’s Cobra
Source: Pixabay

Bitcoin [BTC], the world’s largest cryptocurrency, saw a significant surge earlier this month, helping the coin break strong resistance at $5,000 and $5,200. Following the great fall of the king coin in early 2018, the Bitcoin ecosystem was struggling with scalability and technological issues, eventually leading to the hard fork.

Bitcoin.org’s Cobra, who is also the co-owner of Bitcointalk.org, has always maintained that Bitcoin was the cryptocurrency to look out for through his various Twitter bouts with prominent personalities in the cryptoverse. Due to his strong, unbridled support for Bitcoin, he has often trashed altcoins for their low market dominance.

In a new Twitter thread, Cobra spoke about the “biggest threat” to the Bitcoin ecosystem. Even though many crypto-enthusiasts believe that governments and technological issues were the biggest threats to the king coin, Cobra had a completely different opinion.

According to the Bitcoin maximalist, users have the potential to signal Bitcoin’s doom. His tweet read,

Source: Twitter

Source: Twitter

Though most Bitcoin supporters usually support his opinions, this tweet was met with a lot of resistance. Twitterati swarmed the thread in an attempt to prove him wrong. A user named @MrHodl alleged that this could not be true as Bitcoin had “no community.” He added that this, in turn, prevented toxicity in the ecosystem.

Cobra replied to the tweet stating,



“I think there is a community, it’s just not fully representative of everyone with a stake in Bitcoin. Most holders are quiet and not too familiar with what’s going on. There’s people with 1000+ BTC and they don’t engage at all with discussion platforms, just lurk.”

Some Twitter users took it as an attack on Bitcoin investors and opposed Cobra’s stance. A user @CarstenBKK commented,

“Maybe I am lost in translation. What do you wanna tell us? That you are part of Bitcoin network of people owning/using it, but you are just disgusted by the idea, that the network is called community in the sense of direct human collaboration and affection to the groups ideals?”

Previously, Cobra had accused Twitter’s Jack Dorsey and Square Crypto of pandering to Bitcoin users, while also suggesting that the crypto project was merely a way to bring in more users for Dorsey’s CashApp. His tweet read,

“Gotta respect how hard @sqcrypto is pandering to Bitcoiners. Very clever how @Jack has embedded himself in the community; in return the community promotes @CashApp, which gives that service a small but dedicated and activist group of early users.”





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter


Continue Reading

Trending