Tagged: bitcoin Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • user 3:32 pm on May 21, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , bitcoin, , , , , Pressure,   

    Central Banks Face Bitcoin Pressure 

    Given that the ‘distributed ledger’ upon which has been developed allows a payment system to operate without the need for intermediaries such as , it is looking increasingly likely that the financial system is set to undergo a comprehensive transformation.

    It also implies that centralized payment systems could begin to be phased out and replaced by decentralized ones, with trading, clearing and settlement being just three examples of processes likely to undergo disintermediation.

    Whereas a centralized system relies on all parties to trust a third party (the central bank, in most cases) to keep a secure, correct digital record of transactions, the Bitcoin transaction relies on there being numerous copies of this record distributed across the network. Assuming, then, that the cryptography of the system works, the requirement for a third-party becomes largely irrelevant.

    Centralized vs Distributed Ledger | Bitcoin pressure

    (Source)

    The monetary system of Bitcoin challenges the central banks&8217; role

    Central banks play a pivotal role in ensuring financial stability within a monetary system, however, meaning that payment innovations are being closely monitored by banks such as the Fed, the European Central Bank and the Bank of England. Indeed, central banks have a responsibility in supporting safe payment systems.

    Bitcoin’s notable price volatility since its creation, for instance, is one of the key concerns for central banks &; were a systematic price crash to occur, it remains debatable as to just how much responsibility the central bank could or should bear. Even the bank is technically not at fault, a widespread loss of confidence in the bank and the financial system could still arise.

     

    More researches on digital currencies are expectedly conducted

    Most central banks are in ‘monitoring mode’ at present, generally stating that more research needs to be done before policy can be considered. More recently, however, Bitcoin’s growth has prompted some central banks to express interest in possibly issuing their own digital currencies, backed by their respective country’s government. While this is yet to materialise anywhere, the Bank of Canada has been among the most open to exploring such technology.

    The bank’s senior deputy governor Carolyn Wilkins stated last month that “we have to envision a world in which people mostly use e-money, perhaps even one that’s not denominated in a national currency, such as Bitcoin”, although remained wary of the ostensible risks that could arise, where central banks would struggle to implement monetary policy and where massive losses could be realized were the currency to crash. Wilkins has made clear that the Bank of Canada will explore the implications of digital currencies over the course of its three-year corporate plan.

     

    The idea is of Government-backed digital currency

    While much of the attention (and indeed, risk-aversion) on Bitcoin has primarily been concerned with the currency’s nascent price volatility, the Bank of England (BoE) has focused more on the potential impact of the distributed ledger technology. The UK central bank has provided particularly glowing feedback to , with the bank’s chief economist Andy Haldane recently praising the technology’s potential capability in solving the challenge of ‘how to establish trust – the essence of money – in a distributed network’.

    Like the Bank of Canada, moreover, Haldane is also in favor of issuing a government-backed digital currency, although in the UK’s case he argues that it could be used to charge a negative interest rate on currency, a measure which is not possible at present due to the widespread use of banknotes which could simply be held in safe deposit boxes to maintain value and would thus render attempts by the central bank to implement a negative rate as useless. The shift from paper to paperless currency, however, opens up the possibility of digital currency creation.

     

    Bitcoin circulation in the market is considerable

    In the BoE’s paper published last year, The Economics of Digital Currencies, the bank estimated that the amount of bitcoins circulating within the UK economy was less than 0.1% of sterling notes and coins and only 0.003% of broad money balances. As such, the impact from any serious Bitcoin fallout on the UK’s financial and monetary systems is considered negligible.

    The Federal Reserve, meanwhile, has gradually become more vocal about the subject. During Bitcoin’s early existence, the US central bank was notoriously silent about Bitcoin, but began discussing the subject soon after the FBI shut down Silk Road – the illegal online marketplace – when 26,000 BTC worth $ 3.6 million was seized in October 2013.

    In early 2014, Fed chief Janet Yellen stated that the Fed does not have the authority to regulate Bitcoin, due to the fact that this is ‘payment innovation that is taking place entirely outside the banking industry’. She did raise concerns about the potential for money-laundering, however, and has also recommended that Congress address the legality issues for those unregulated entities involved in virtual currencies.

    The Fed has also conducted empirical analysis which has sought to test the security of the cryptography for transactions and the distributed maintenance of the ledger. The US central bank has remained somewhat averse to Bitcoin, highlighting the February 2014 bankruptcy of Mt. Gox, the largest bitcoin exchange at the time, and concluding, therefore, that Bitcoin many risks “whose nature and proportion are little, if at all, understood”.

    More recently, the Fed’s official position has been to quietly monitor developments as they happen, but it has not stated whether it is considering issuing its own digital currency.

     

    Digital currency, Bitcoin, raises several potential risks

    The Bank of International Settlements (BIS), however, seems to have recently shown considerable enthusiasm towards the advancement of digital currencies. Although not explicitly a central bank, the BIS holds the membership of 60 global central banks, and has been instrumental in determining much of the regulatory landscape since 2007’s financial crisis. In its November 2015 paper, the CPMI Report on Digital Currencies, the BIS states several potential risks arising from the growing use of digital currencies, such as consumer losses resulting from excessive volatility, as well as fraud &8211; a problem which has plagued Bitcoin on previous occasions.

    The report also acknowledges the diminished role that financial intermediaries could play as digital currencies and distributed ledger systems become smarter. Ultimately, though the BIS’ opinion on digital currencies remains favorable, especially pertaining to those which have a decentralized payment mechanism, describing them as “an innovation that could have a range of impacts on various aspects of financial markets and the wider economy”.

     

    Yuan was used in 80% Bitcoin transaction

    The challenge in addressing Bitcoin appears to be more complex for China’s central bank at present, however. According to Goldman Sachs research from March 2015, the Yuan is being used for 80% of global transactions into and out of Bitcoin, indicating the digital currency’s overwhelming popularity in China. This wouldn’t be so much of a problem were it not for the fact that the People’s Bank of China banned the handling of Bitcoin transactions in December 2013, before closing down more than 10 of the currency’s exchanges in March 2014.

    The view from the central bank is that the currency has no ‘real meaning’, but the consensus view is that it is being used for large-scale money laundering. The huge popularity of Bitcoin in China suggests that, while some may be using Bitcoin for speculative purposes, a large proportion are using the currency to shift money illegally out of China.

     

    Conclusion

    More recently, however, it appears that China’s view towards Bitcoin could be warming. In an October publication, the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) stated clearly that we are now in the “post-Bitcoin era,” acknowledging the development that bitcoin has ushered in through the “expansion of distributed payment and settlement mechanism”. Whether such sentiment will ultimately be transmitted through the corridors of the central bank remains to be seen at this stage.

    Given that minting and distributing a digital currency should cost a fraction of the cost of printing and distributing a physical currency note, one should also bear in mind the seignior age benefits of moving towards paperless currency – that is, the potential revenue the government will retain from such a cost-saving. Along with the fact that digital currency transactions will be easier to track and less susceptible to illegal uses, there seems to be plenty of incentives for central banks to promote the development of digital currencies like Bitcoin.

     

    The post Central Banks Face Bitcoin Pressure appeared first on Fintech Schweiz Digital Finance News – FintechNewsCH.

    Fintech Schweiz Digital Finance News – FintechNewsCH

     
  • user 5:31 pm on May 20, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: bitcoin, , , , , ,   

    Bitcoin Miners Follow Profit to Ethereum Blockchain 

    A well-known Chinese miner gets into as a wide range of high-profile organizations begin to capitalize on the digital currency.
    fintech techcrunch

     
  • user 11:54 pm on May 16, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: 'Thunder', bitcoin, , , , , , , , ,   

    Bitcoin Startup Blockchain Releases Code for ‘Thunder’ Payment Channel Tech 

    The development of payments channels on the network took a step forward today with new released by wallet .
    fintech techcrunch

     
  • user 4:56 pm on May 15, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , bitcoin, , , , Jedi, ,   

    Return of the FinServ Jedi 

    Roberto Ferrari recently tweeted this:

    Screen Shot 2016-05-08 at 10.40.05 AM

    From roboadvisory to p2p lending to crowdlending, to PFM, to mobile wallet concepts focused on payments, to the early days of , there is a long list of d2c business models which have not reached the escape velocity investors had hoped for since 2008. I would be hard pressed to find one fintech startup out of this list that reached escape velocity without any help from a incumbent &; partnership, commercial agreement, warehouse facility, distribution access, white label deal, acquisition you name it. To be clear, I am speaking of real traction, not gravitation-free valuation. This factual observation has led many fintech pundits to state that, although the financial services industry will be disrupted and is in need of innovation, a direct and material challenge from fintech startups is unlikely.

    Bringing this factual observation in historical context I wanted to order the immediate waves of fintech we have experienced and attempt to forecast the industry&;s immediate future. This immediately led me to seek out the past. A much trickier proposition than I initially thought when studying financial services and .

    I came up with the following non-scientific historical narrative:

    – Ancient Financial Technology Period &8211; 3200 BC to 500 AD: Little is known about financial technology in this period marked by the beginning of mathematics and what astute observers can only assume was archaic credit provisioning and proto-fraud.

    – Financial Technology Middle Ages Period &8211; 500 AD to 1499 AD: Arguably the greatest advance in financial technology during this period was the invention of double entry accounting by Italian merchants.

    – Classical Financial Technology Period &8211; 1500 AD to 1900 AD: Much like the two prior periods, little is known about classical financial technology. We note the invention of the pantelegraph in 1865 in France (could not resist mentioning that), to verify banking signatures, and the laying of the first transatlantic cable in 1866 which was a crucial starting point for the globalization of financial communications

    – Modern Financial Technology Period &8211; 1901 AD to 1980 AD: As with every other human endeavor, this period sees an acceleration of innovation. We note the invention of the ATM, the credit card, the telex. The creation of FedWire, SWIFT, NASDAQ. The deployment of consumer credit on a massive scale, mortgages, securitization.

    – Postmodern Financial Technology History &8211; 1980 AD to 2008 AD: The rise of the internet permeates this period. Few people realize that Etrade was founded in 1982, online banking started in the mid 80s, that Intuit started in 1985 with Quicken, that by the mid 90s all major had been pushed kicking and screaming into internet banking. Lest we forget, Paypal was founded in December 1998. The bulk of financial technology action centered around financial technology service providers selling decidedly &;unsexy&; technology to incumbents.

    – Contemporary Fintech History &8211; 2008 AD to present: The rise of a new term and a new activity by 2008, &8220;FinTech&8221;. The first FinTech wave, from 2008 til 2014, focused on d2c models (mainly) + payments (mostly retail) + roboadvisory + p2p lending + digitizing distribution channels of banking and asset management. Competition and disruption were the central buzzwords. VC investors the main providers of capital. The second FinTech wave, from 2014 to 2016, saw a shift to b2b and b2b2c models and a widening to other areas of financial services such as insurance + capital markets + specialized lending. Collaboration between startups and incumbents became the central buzzword. VC investors saw the rise of Corporate VC investors (CVCs owned by banks, insurers). I believe we are witnessing the last moments of this second wave. Indeed, I believe we are witnessing the beginning of a third &8220;FinTech&8221; wave, starting with 2016. One which will still focus on b2b or b2b2c models. One where CVCs will play a more dominant role, relatively speaking, compared to their VC brethren. One where more startups will focus on becoming the new service providers to the industry and where the industry will acquire enabling technologies (Artificial Intelligence (AI), Augmented Reality (AR), Internet of Things (IoT), Quantum Computing (QC), /Consensus Ledgers) to upgrade itself in all manners and across its business/tech stack. I call this third wave the TechFin wave, to differentiate it from the origins of financial technology and the first two waves of fintech.

    As you can see from the above historical timeline, financial technology ruled prior to 2008. Most innovations were either b2b or b2b2c in nature. Direct to consumer was the exception (Intuit, Etrade, maybe Paypal to a certain degree). I chose 2008 as a pivot away from financial technology and towards fintech because startups such as Wealthfront and Betterment were founded that year and because, the 2007-2008 global financial crisis finally broke the dam so to speak with systemic and systematic innovation being enabled. Might the period from 2008 to 2015 be an anomaly where d2c became more prevalent than b2b and where for the first time there was a hope, a promise and an intent for startups to directly dislodge incumbents? If true, is the new TechFin wave of the Contemporary period borne out of a natural consolidation stemming from the breathless pace of investments since 2008? Or will it become the new normal for a long period? Food for thought assuredly.

    Let us focus on why this new TechFin wave makes sense.

    Think about how vulnerable most incumbent service providers are to innovation as they have mostly aborted any meaningful internal R&D efforts and resorted to M&A activities to stay relevant over the years. Think about how some independent VCs may reduce their exposure due to either losses from early investments or less than expected returns. Think about how CVCs will expand to include not only banks or insurers, but also consultancy firms, systems integrators, other third parties that live off of selling/implementing/integrating technology for finserv incumbents. Many of these top firms will want to make sure they stay relevant to their clients and will start investing in promising startups. (Whether firms that do not have a strong culture of venture investing will make good venture investors is another topic entirely.). Think about the wealth of subject matter expertise, capital, brand (even if eroded) and the advantage of being regulated (even if it comes at a cost) finserv incumbents&8217; CVCs can leverage.

    This third wave has the potential to help finserv incumbents close the technology gap. I wrote about this gap in one of my previous posts, see here: a dual gap where basic infrastructure will be upgraded (a necessary step but not a sufficient one on its own) AND where cutting edge technology will be embedded throughout an incumbent&8217;s business stack &8211; for a sense of what that means, see this post on the &8220;plasma&8221; approach to technology/business.

    I do mean &8220;potential&8221;. Incumbents will have to operate a cultural evolution in order to learn several skills necessary to actualize this potential.

    These are in no particular order and non-exhaustively:

    &8211; Master a platform strategy (think of the comprehensive platform strategies tech giants have deployed)

    &8211; Redefine their core businesses/services

    &8211; Develop new ways to deliver their core businesses/services (API, marketplaces, Banking/Insurance/Asset Management as a Service, or as a Platform)

    &8211; Learn how to collaborate (it is not enough to sing commercial agreements and partnerships)

    &8211; Upgrade and retain knowledge experts across a variety of subject matters

    &8211; Master and execute intrapreneurship (corporate entrepreneurship)

    &8211; Architect the right innovation &8220;engine&8221; to translate, digest and disseminate innovation, new technologies, new business models coming from the outside world.

    I am sure I am missing a few salient vectors here. The purpose of this exercise is to hint at the possibilities incumbents could create with the right approach.

    With capital, brand and knowledge expertise it is not far fetched to imagine a future where a finserv incumbent would be adept at: 1) building businesses from within, 2) spinning off said businesses, 3) invest and partner with young startups, 4) reinvent their core businesses. The end result would make for mean, lean fighting machines.

    I believe we are in the first innings of this potential transformation. We can witness most large banks and insurance companies as well as asset managers tinkering with venture investments, with both internal and external innovation groups, with participation in accelerators, incubators. Baby steps all, but important first steps nonetheless.

    Setting aside outside stimuli such as regulatory overview, interest rate environment, political interference, the central question is &8220;How should incumbents architect themselves to successfully operate such a transformation and ride the third TechFin wave?&8221; This I believe, is the issue finserv incumbents are in control of and which will define their future. Innovating from within when one is a large organization is also one of the most difficult if not the most difficult exercise in the corporate world, for reasons most know &8211; not flexible, not nimble, natural barriers to change, smartest minds focused on keeping main business afloat. Many corporations have tried in the past and failed. Indeed, some voices firmly believe genuine innovation can only come from outside of a finserv incumbent. Further, finserv incumbents face formidable competitors in the likes of GAFAA (Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Alibaba)

    I am firming up my thinking around that central question and would be interested in your thoughts. In the meantime, are we observing the of finserv Jedis and the rise of TechFin service providers? Is TechFin here to stay?

    FiniCulture

     
  • user 7:00 pm on May 14, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , bitcoin, , ,   

    Blockchain is a disruption we simply have to embrace 

    By Alex Tapscott with Don Tapscott, co-authors, Revolution

    The likely to have the greatest impact on the financial services industry and the world of business has arrived. Not peer-to-peer lending, artificial intelligence, big data, -advisers or Apple Pay – I’m talking about the blockchain, the technology behind digital currencies such as . Blockchain represents nothing less than the second generation of the Internet, and it holds the potential to profoundly transform the financial services industry.

    Because the first generation of the Internet was built for moving and storing information, not value, it has done little to change how we do business or access financial services. When you send someone information, you’re really sending a copy, not the original. It’s okay to have a printing press for information – but not for money.

    As a result, we rely on powerful intermediaries, such as , to establish trust. Today’s financial intermediaries also perform eight important functions in business and society: authenticating identity and reputation, moving value, storing value, lending and borrowing, exchanging value, funding and investing, insurance and risk management, and audit and tax. We call these the “golden eight,” and they will all be transformed through blockchain.

    Over all, these intermediaries do an okay job, but with limitations. They use centralized servers, which can be hacked. They take fees. They capture our data. They run on outmoded technology. Regulations are antiquated. These intermediaries also exclude two billion unbanked people who can’t prove identity or don’t have enough money to justify a bank account. In sum, intermediaries capture a lopsided share of the benefits of the digital economy, just as they did in the predigital economy.

    Enter blockchain, a vast, global and distributed ledger running on millions of devices and open to anyone, where not just information but anything ofvalue – money, equities, bonds and other financial assets, titles, deeds, music, art, scientific discoveries, intellectual property, even votes – can be moved and stored securely and privately, and where trust is established not by powerful intermediaries but through mass collaboration and clever code.

    If the Internet was the first native digital format for information, then blockchain is the first native digital format for value – a new medium for money. It acts as ledger of accounts, database, notary, sentry and clearing house, all by consensus. And it holds the potential to make financial markets radically more efficient, secure, inclusive and transparent.

    Blockchain entrepreneurs and incumbents alike are working to devise new ways to perform the eight core functions of financial intermediaries through blockchain technology.

    Authentication of identity and reputation

    Today, we rely on rating agencies, analytics firms and banks to establish trust, verify identity in transactions and decide who merits access to the system. In contrast, reputation accrues on the blockchain itself. Blockchain technology lowers or eliminates the need for trust altogether.

    Moving and storing value

    Blockchain startups such as Circle, Abra and Paycase want to make retail banking a global free commodity, like Google, and can do so because their back end, supported by blockchain, is secure and inexpensive to run. “When was the last time you sent a ‘cross-border e-mail’?” asked Jeremy Allaire, CEO of Circle, rhetorically. He bets hundreds of millions of millennials globally will find this prospect appealing.

    Lending

    Retail, commercial and mercantile banks, along with credit scoring and rating firms, facilitate the issuance of credit card debt, mortgages, corporate and municipal bonds, T-bills and asset-backed securities. On the blockchain, anyone could check creditworthiness before issuing, trading and settling traditional debt instruments directly, reducing friction and increasing transparency. The unbanked and entrepreneurs everywhere could access loans from peers.

     Exchanging value

    Market-making will change profoundly as financial assets move from a paper-based format to a native digital format based on blockchain. Settlement times on transactions can be reduced from days or weeks to minutes or seconds. This is a huge opportunity for incumbents to reduce cost, but it also poses risks.

     Venture capital, IPOs and project finance

    The halcyon days of entrepreneurship may be upon us. Ethereum, a blockchain platform supported by Microsoft, Manulife, Deloitte and others, got its start as a “blockchain IPO” – issuing native tokens for bitcoins. No need for bankers, lawyers, auditors and stock exchanges. Today, it’s worth $1-billion (U.S.). Blockchain also automates the matchmaking, enabling more efficient, transparent, secure models for peer-to-peer financing, recording dividends and paying coupons.

     Insurance and risk management

    Using reputation systems based on a person’s economic and social capital, insurers will be able to make better-informed decisions, which explains why Manulife just announced a flagship agreement with blockchain developer Consensus Systems. The over-the-counter derivatives market, with a notional value of $600-trillion, is paper-based and opaque and relies too heavily on centralized clearinghouses. Moving all derivatives to blockchain would reduce counterparty and systemic risk in the financial system.

     Accounting

    Traditional accounting practices are not keeping pace with the velocity and complexity of modern finance. The blockchain’s distributed ledger will make auditing transparent through time-stamped third entries on a blockchain, enabling regulators to more easily scrutinize financial actions within a corporation in real time. Deloitte, PWC and others are investigating these “triple-entry” accounting schemes for their audit practices.

    Given the promise and peril, Wall Street has woken up in a big way. More than 45 leading banks, including Royal Bank of Canada , have joined the R3CEV Consortium to develop blockchain infrastructure for banking. IBM launched the Hyperledger project, which counts Deutsche Bank, the London Stock Exchange Group and Wells Fargo as members. Microsoft is in the game, as are Visa, Cisco, Intel and many other leading tech companies.

    Venture capitalists are piling in, too. In 2014 and 2015 alone, more than $1-billion of venture capital flooded into the emerging ecosystem, and the rate of investment is doubling annually.

    “We’re quite confident,” said Marc Andreessen, an Internet icon and venture capitalist, “that when we’re sitting here in 20 years, we’ll be talking about blockchain the way we talk about the Internet today.”

    Governments believe blockchain could simplify and improve the delivery of services and empower regulators and central bankers to do their jobs more effectively.

    So is this the death knell for financial services or a new platform for reinvention? For sure, blockchain will create winners and losers. Banks can thrive if they can steer clear of the innovator’s dilemma and disrupt from within. Leaders of the old rarely embrace the new, but we remain hopeful.

    The greatest opportunity for Canada is to use blockchain to kick-start our innovation economy by embracing the entrepreneurs who are instigating change.

    Canadian entrepreneurs have been on the leading edge of blockchain innovation from the beginning. Ethereum, mentioned earlier, was founded by a group of Canadian developers, led by Vitalik Buterin. It recently became the first crowd-funded blockchain “unicorn.” Consensus Systems, run by Canadian CEO Joseph Lubin, is a blockchain juggernaut, building applications to reinvent a dozen industries. And a growing constellation of entrepreneurs and technologists are trying to build the future at companies such as Ledger Labs, Paycase, Unocoin and Blockstream.

    Can we nurture an environment where entrepreneurs and their ideas can flourish? There is a critical mass of talent in Canada right now. What’s needed is bold, multistakeholder leadership. The unstoppable force of blockchain technology is barrelling down on the immovable infrastructure of modern finance. We would like this collision to transform the old money machine into a prosperity platform for all.

     


    [linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/dontapscott” connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”Alex Tapscott”] is CEO and founder of Northwest Passage Ventures, an advisory firm building industry-leading blockchain businesses.

    This piece is adapted from his book, with co-author Don Tapscott, Blockchain Revolution: How the Technology Behind Bitcoin Is Changing Money, Business and the World. A version of this article originally appeared on TheGlobeandMail.com

     
  • user 6:40 pm on May 13, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , bitcoin, , , , , ,   

    Bank of Japan Official: Central Banks Need to Watch Blockchain 

    A of said this week that should developments surrounding and “closely”.
    CoinDesk

     
  • user 3:40 pm on May 13, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: $6.5, bitcoin, , , , , , TechBureau   

    Japan’s TechBureau Raises $6.5 Million for Bitcoin and Blockchain Services 

    A Japanese startup has reportedly raised $ 6.2m in a new Series A funding round.
    CoinDesk

     
  • user 5:56 pm on May 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Barack, bitcoin, , , , , , Heed, , , ,   

    Former CFTC Official: Barack Obama ‘Should Heed the Call’ on Bitcoin 

    The administration move quickly to embrace and , a government regulator has argued in a new op-ed.
    fintech techcrunch

     
  • user 3:41 pm on May 11, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , bitcoin, , , Overtakes,   

    State of Blockchain Q1 2016: Blockchain Funding Overtakes Bitcoin 

    CoinDesk has released its latest “ of ” report, analyzing news and events from Q1 .
    CoinDesk

     
  • user 8:14 pm on May 10, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: bitcoin, BitPagos, , , , , , , , ,   

    BitPagos uses the blockchain to enable credit for online payments in emerging markets 

    tcdisrupt_NY16-4966 The world is familiar with being used for many things. , long-distance remittance, even a substitute for gold, but what about ? Not so much &; and that&;s where , a startup competing in the Battlefield pitch competition at TechCrunch Disrupt New York, wants to make its mark. Read More


    fintech techcrunch

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel
Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami