Altcoins Analysis Bitcoin Blockchain

Yield App And Unstoppable Domains Join Forces To Offer Fully Customizable NFT Domains

Yield App And Unstoppable Domains Join Forces To Offer Fully Customizable NFT Domains

Yield App and Unstoppable Domains are excited to announce their partnership, allowing customers access to free, fully customizable NFT domains. As per the announcement, the partnership will see Yield App wallets fully integrated with Unstoppable Domains, allowing users to link their wallets to their personalized NFT domain. Users will no longer need multiple crypto wallets […]

Bitcoin Blockchain Crypto News

Societe Generale – FORGE selects METACO to manage blockchain asset capabilities

Societe Generale – FORGE (SG FORGE), a fully integrated subsidiary of Societe Generale, providing issuers and investors with end-to-end services to issue, invest and manage digital-native security tokens registered on public blockchains, has selected METACO, a provider of digital asset management technology and infrastructure, to orchestrate its digital asset custody operations. Since 2019, Societe Generale and its […]

The post Societe Generale – FORGE selects METACO to manage blockchain asset capabilities appeared first on CryptoNinjas.

Altcoins Ethereum

Here’s What’s Needed for Leading Ethereum Rival To Surge by 700% and Reclaim All-Time High: Coin Bureau Host

A popular crypto analyst is identifying what could help leading Ethereum rival Polkadot (DOT) recapture its all-time high. In a new video, Coin Bureau host Guy tells his 2.07 million subscribers the reasons for DOT’s poor price performance. “First is the fact that the rest of the crypto market has been getting wrecked, notably [Bitcoin] […]

The post Here’s What’s Needed for Leading Ethereum Rival To Surge by 700% and Reclaim All-Time High: Coin Bureau Host appeared first on The Daily Hodl.

Crypto News

More security, transparency, and scalability: What blockchain needs for mass adoption

In February 2022, the Ukrainian government ran a crypto donation campaign to support victims of the Russian invasion. When the nation tried to reward those who had contributed to the fundraiser by sending crypto wallet holders complimentary NFTs, a slew of scammers took advantage of the government’s generosity, causing the operation to cease. Rug pull scams like this, where cyber criminals drain money from unsuspecting investors, aren’t uncommon in the crypto space, unfortunately. Shortly following the Ukraine rug pull, in March this year, hackers discovered a weakness in the Ronin blockchain used by popular play-to-earn platform Axie Infinity. In the security breach, the scammers ended up stealing $165 million from Axie’s parent company, Sky Mavis. In addition to rug pull scams, cryptocurrency exchanges can be compromised through poor security or fraud. This is what happened in 2014 when the Mt. Gox exchange collapsed in a years-long attack by hackers. By the time the breach was detected, a loss of between $300 million and $480 million of users’ funds had occurred. Since the attack, it has been estimated that $1.5 billion in cryptocurrencies have been stolen from exchanges. Blockchain’s utility isn’t limited to just cryptocurrency, though. The shared and immutable ledger’s ability to provide transparency and security allows it to be applied to numerous other sectors, including real estate, supply chains and gambling. Although the technology has taken the world by storm over the last few years, issues like the inability to hold scammers accountable for rug pull scams have plagued the industry, preventing it from being adopted into the mainstream. Additionally, large demand on blockchains that slow their transaction speed requires improvements to the technology’s ability to scale, a problem that many blockchains have so far struggled to achieve. Newcomer to the blockchain space, Zetrix, has found a solution to address issues relating to transparency and security in the blockchain. It can facilitate smart contracts and deliver privacy, plus its cryptographic infrastructure can be introduced to multiple industries, creating a more transparent and efficient process. Zetrix’s network also has incredible scaling ability, being able to withstand 10,000 transactions per second. In addition, Zetrix uses DPoS (Delegated Proof of Stake) to secure the blockchain by ensuring representation of transactions within it. DPoS is designed for implementing tech-based democracy using elections and voting processes to protect from centralization. The Zetrix DPoS mechanism is implemented through smart contracts with a dynamic upgrade mechanism that adjusts to the difficulty level of validating node access as Zetrix’s network expands, which means no matter how vast the network grows, the privacy and security of its users will remain intact. As an added measure, the consensus mechanism allows transactions to be validated before being added to the blockchain, and all validators are voted in via a contract. In a groundbreaking new report by the Institute of Industrial Internet & IoT, China Academy of Information and Communications Technology (CAICT), the blockchain confirmed that it can complete transactions using a significantly low amount of energy compared to other blockchains. Specifically, it only requires 21 super nodes and 100 common nodes to complete a transaction, compared to Bitcoin, which uses 2.2 million super nodes, and Ethereum’s Proof of Work (PoW) blockchain which uses 2.3 million super nodes. Zetrix’s mission is to connect countries and their governments, businesses, and people to a global blockchain-based economy. The platform wants to make native blockchain and cross-chain solutions accessible and effortless by bringing rapid-deployment solutions to the market with meaningful benefits and real-world impact for countries, businesses, and users. By building a future ecosystem of Ubiquitous Trust Networks, the next-generation layer-1 public blockchain infrastructure allows value to be transferred freely on and across blockchains, just as information moves freely across the internet. As a result, by harnessing digital assets, decentralised applications can be developed and deployed rapidly on its network. Blockchain technology has been rapidly adopted by many industries over the past decade, but mainstream adoption still remains a challenge due to the prevalent issues faced including issues with security, transparency, and scalability. Newcomers to the space like Zetrix are proving that these issues can once and for all be addressed, providing a much-needed step forward for this revolutionary technology.      

Crypto News

CoinEx Institution|From NFT to NFT-fi: Real Demands or False Propositions?

  It has been more than a year since the NFT boom in 2021. According to NFTGO, the market cap of NFTs peaked at $36.8 billion in March 2022. As the market later cooled, the trading volume and market cap of NFTs started to shrink. This crypto novelty expanded its influence beyond the crypto community and fostered a huge market, which also gave rise to the combination of NFTs and DeFi. The market has witnessed the appearance of NFT lending platforms, NFT aggregators, and NFT derivatives markets, which constitutes the second debut of DeFi Lego enabled by NFTs. However, one wonders whether these products were built to meet real market demands and if they have created a false proposition that lacks any value for market participation. Today, we will dive into whether NFT-fi is a feasible trend and if it will earn market recognition. Figure 1: Market Cap & Volume of NFTs | Source: nftgo.com | As of June 1, 2022 There are many NFT liquidity solutions and NFT structured products in today’s market: 1. NFT fragmentation: FT tokens (such as ERC20 tokens) that are issued by dividing the ownership of valuable NFTs. NFT fragmentation projects include Fractional.art, NFTX, etc. 2. NFT lending markets: Holders can borrow short-term loans by collateralizing their NFTs without selling them. Prominent NFT lending markets include BendDAO, NFTfi, and Drops DAO. 3. NFT leasing: Holders earn rents by leasing NFTs to users in need. NFT leasing projects include Double, reNFT, etc. 4. NFT aggregators: These aggregators, such as Gem.xyz, bring together the transaction data of multiple NFT exchanges, obtain the best NFT transaction price in one stop, and provide users with increased liquidity and more options. 5. NFT derivatives: NFT derivatives include NFT options like Putty, as well as NFT perpetual futures contracts such as NFTprep. These projects are early attempts to bring together NFTs and DeFi. In particular, NFT fragmentation projects and NFT aggregators address the problems of poor NFT liquidity and high market threshold. NFT lending markets and NFT leasing projects also focus on improving NFT liquidity and capital utilization. Meanwhile, NFT derivatives are more complex structured products built to improve capital utilization. However, these projects have not been able to achieve large-scale adoption because they face limitations in terms of the underlying NFT logic and the development space. Next, we will explore the real demands and false propositions of NFTs. Real Demands 1. The capital utilization of NFTs needs to be improved, allowing holders to collateralize their NFTs for partial liquidity when running out of cash. 2. The liquidity problem of NFTs should be addressed, enabling holders to quickly buy/sell the NFTs they own. False Propositions Did the capital utilization of NFTs go higher? The problem of NFTs’ capital utilization can be seen in two aspects: 1) Users need to quickly buy and sell NFTs, and the transaction frequency should not be affected by the poor liquidity of NFTs; 2) Users should be able to quickly exchange their NFTs for liquidity and obtain cash for other purposes. When it comes to FT tokens, capital utilization can be improved through staking, leverage, etc. However, in the NFT market, there are only a few ways through which users can improve their capital utilization. In addition, combining finance with NFT significantly increases the learning cost. Right now, most NFT holders still rely on the “buy low and sell high” strategy. Moreover, most such holders are not the target user of NFT lending projects because only blue-chip NFTs with sound liquidity and value consensus are accepted. In terms of the overall market scale, most users are absorbed by secondary markets and aggregators with low operating thresholds, and they have not achieved any major improvement in capital utilization. As shown in Figure 2, the number of new addresses of Genie and Gem, two NFT aggregators, has been on a steady rise, with increasingly frequent daily transactions. However, as the trading volume and transaction frequency of the two have been hit by the sluggish market conditions of NFTs, Genie and Gem have yet to reach their maximum potential for improving the capital utilization of NFTs. Figure 2: New Addresses and Transactions of NFT Aggregators | Source: Dune @sohwak Let’s turn to the capital utilization of mainstream lending projects. BendDAO is a lending market based on the liquidity pool model where holders can borrow ETH from the pool after collateralizing their blue-chip NFTs. Due to recent market fluctuations, a large amount of ETH deposit in BendDAO’s liquidity pool has been withdrawn, which resulted in decreased ETH supply. Yet, the ETH loans have remained at around 19,000 ETH, while the MA14 supply stands at 46,000. As such, we can make the rough estimate that BendDAO’s capital utilization is about 41%. Figure 3: Bend ETH Utilization | Source: Dune@cgq0123 Note: MA14 refers to the moving average in 14 days, while MA7 indicates the moving average in 7 days NFTfi is a lending market following the P2P model. The amount, interest rate, and duration of loans on NFTfi are jointly determined by liquidity providers and NFT lenders, which is more flexible in terms of the loan rate. The number of monthly loans offered via NFTfi increased from 21 in May 2020 to 2,000+ in May 2022, and the maximum monthly loan amount reached $27.52 million (March 2022), but this figure only accounted for 1% of the market cap of blue-chip NFTs (as reported by NSN-BlueCHIP 10). Figure 4: NFTfi Monthly Loan Volume by Count/Value | Source: Dune@gideontay JPEG’d is also a P2P model lending protocol, and it now only provides collateralized lending for Cryptopunks, EtherRocks, BAYC, and MAYC. After staking NFT, holders will receive PUSD, a stablecoin, provided by the protocol from the pool. Additionally, JPEG’d also features a 32% capital utilization limit on lending. Of course, there are also other early-stage NFT derivatives platforms, but they have not introduced any mature products, so we could not analyze their capital utilization. Despite that, it is foreseeable that such NFT derivatives will come with higher learning costs as they are products designed for professional traders with greater risk appetite. As such, their growth potential is limited in today’s NFT market. Asset Pricing and Liquidation Risks? The pricing of NFTs has been so frequently discussed that it has now become a cliché. People are concerned with the issue because the price swings of NFTs will expose NFT lending or derivatives to liquidation risks. As the NFT prices fell over the recent period, BendDAO has started several liquidation auctions. Although most of the lending protocols out there have adopted over-collateralization, in the face of wild price swings, many NFTs would be liquidated and sold in marketplaces. This, coupled with the poor liquidity of NFTs, might lead to panic selling, which would create downward price spirals, ultimately turning the loans into bad debts. The pricing of NFTs is subject to multiple factors. Plus, it is also easily manipulated. For example, big holders could maliciously raise the floor price and then liquidate the NFTs on purpose, and an NFT could take a price plunge due to hacking or smart contract loopholes. Moreover, NFT pricing could also be affected by many intangible factors. For instance, the price of an NFT could soar if a famous person suddenly buys it in large amounts or if it releases a new airdrop plan. As most lenders cannot accurately estimate the intrinsic value of their NFTs, they are vulnerable to liquidation if they borrowed loans or applied leverage. This is also one of the reasons why NFT lending and derivatives have not gained mass adoption: Blue-chip NFT holders are worried that they might suffer losses in the above scenarios, which is why they are reluctant to collateralize their NFTs. Do blue-chip NFT holders really need NFT loans? All NFT lending markets focus on blue-chip NFTs, but most blue-chip NFT holders are not in great need of loans. To begin with, such holders care more about their ownership of the NFTs, just like billionaires would not use their collectibles as collateral for loans. Secondly, NFT loans come with unknown risks, and many blue-chip NFT holders refuse to apply for such loans after weighing the risks against the benefits. Thirdly, applying for NFT loans comes with high learning costs, and not every user can understand the principle behind such loans. Let’s compare the user base of the major NFT lending projects. As of June 15, there are about 2.4 million holders in the NFT market, of which 27,833 hold blue-chip NFTs (a user will be regarded as a blue-chip NFT holder as long as he owns at least one such NFT), according to NFTGO. There are 771 borrowers on BendDAO, 1,038 on NFTfi, and 51 on Arcade. As users must first deposit/collateralize their NFTs before applying for a loan, we can regard all these borrowers as blue-chip NFT holders. It is therefore clear that most blue-chip NFT holders are not users of NFT lending markets. Figure 5: Bend ETH Borrowers & Depositors | Source: Dune@cgq0123 Could NFT-fi projects retain users with the same old incentive? Lending or derivatives projects also bear the task of improving the protocol’s liquidity. Most such projects offer native tokens as the incentive for recruiting NFT holders and depositors as they go live. In this regard, these projects resemble DeFi liquidity mining platforms that attract speculators with high APYs. However, the problem is that they would not be able to maintain such liquidity if the APYs went down. Attracting users with token incentives is still the same old approach. Though this strategy could create a large user base at the very beginning, no one knows whether the protocol could retain users. For example, when the project was first launched, BendDAO airdropped BEND tokens to users who had deposited blue-chip NFTs and ETH. It also uses BEND as a subsidy when paying interests. However, the interest rate went down when the BEND price dropped, which slowed down the growth rate of new users. As such, attracting users with high APYs is only the first step. To retain new users, they must further explore the lending mechanisms, address the oracle pricing issue, and mitigate the liquidation risks. Projects should develop more flexible products while expanding the scope of NFT lending. Last but not least, they could also provide risk reviews, lower the learning cost, and offer more satisfying user experiences. Conclusion The evolution from NFT to NFT-fi is a process in which a market grows from its infancy to a more mature stage. However, it is also inevitably a process that’s full of doubts, traps, and problems. As NFT-fi projects seek to meet real demands, they will also have to face doubts that they are stating false propositions. Today’s NFT market is like a newborn child who needs to grow up and stick through challenges. Although NFT-fi might be a great attempt, there is still a long way to go, and NFT-fi projects have to keep exploring their underlying logic to earn market recognition.

Crypto News

ViaBTC Capital | Reasons Behind Solana’s Frequent Downtime: Design Flaws in the Gas Economy

What is the gas fee? In the blockchain world, the gas fee is a fee that users have to pay to the blockchain network for each transaction. For example, when a user makes a transfer on Ethereum, miners must package his transaction and put it on the blockchain to complete the transaction. This process consumes the computing resources of the blockchain, and the fee paid to miners is called the gas fee. Gas economy Imagine that each public chain is a society or a city, and gas would be the currency that users need for various activities in the city, and the economic designs of gas have far-reaching impacts on the public chain’s future development. Today, we will illustrate the significance of the gas economy from the perspectives of performance and value capture. Performance – The frequent network congestion of Solana In early May, Solana’s mainnet lost consensus, and block generation was suspended for 7 hours. The mainnet was down due to the NFT minting of a new NFT project. Users turned to bots for sending transactions as much as possible to increase their success rate of minting. This led to 6 million transactions per second on the Solana mainnet, which jammed the network. Moreover, as Solana transmits consensus messages as a special transaction message between validators, the heavily congested network also disabled the normal transmission of consensus messages, eventually leading to the loss of consensus. This is not the first downtime of Solana. Last September, the public chain suffered a 17-hour downtime due to the massive trading volume created by on-chain bots during the launch of the hit project Raydium. A 30-hour Solana downtime incident happened at the end of January 2022 when the BTC price plunged from $44,000 to $33,000 during a market crash and created plenty of arbitrage opportunities. Meanwhile, the liquidation/arbitrage bots on Solana, which center on DeFi, kept creating massive transactions, which resulted in network downtime. When comparing Solana to a conventional IT system, we can tell that the downtime resembles a DDoS attack. 「A DDoS (distributed denial-of-service) attack refers to adding traffic from multiple sources to exceed the processing capacity of a network so that real users would not be able to acquire the resources or services they need. Attackers often launch a DDoS attack by sending more traffic to a network than it can handle or sending more requests to an application than it can manage.」 Instinctively, many people would think that Solana’s downtime is rooted in its public chain designs: the monolithic design of Solana inevitably leads to downtime. At the moment, mainstream public chains use two kinds of designs: the modular and the monolithic. The modular architecture refers to a modularized deployment where consensus, storage, and execution are implemented separately so that the collapse of the execution layer will not compromise the security of the consensus layer. At the same time, mainstream designs adopted by Avalanche’s Subnet, ETH 2.0, and Celestia’s Rollup can all diverge massive transactions. On the other hand, although Solana as a whole is designed to enable fast transactions, scalability and security were sacrificed. However, the modular design of a public chain is not the key because although the consensus stayed secure, the individual rollup could still suffer from downtime when facing overwhelming transactions in a very short period. In other words, the modular design just lowered the systemic risks (e.g., a certain rollup could halt but the rest can survive) for the public chain. The gas design is the real reason behind Solana’s downtime, and more network downtime is on the way if the design is not improved. – The gas mechanisms of different chains The figure below shows the gas designs of three mainstream public chains. On Solana, the gas fee is based on the number of signatures. The more signatures a transaction uses, the higher the gas fee. However, the maximum memory capacity of each transaction is fixed, and so is the maximum gas fee per transaction, which helps users easily calculate the cost of sending massive transaction requests. Moreover, transactions on Solana are not sequenced, which means that when the cost of sending massive requests is lower than the profit (arbitrage, NFT minting, etc.), users would use bots to send transactions on a large scale to increase the likelihood of the execution of their transactions. This is also the reason behind the downtime events that took place on Solana. Ethereum and Avalanche share similar gas designs. Both feature the base fee and the priority fee, which creates an inherent sequencing issue because transactions with a higher priority fee would be first executed. As such, although users can still use bots to create massive transactions on Ethereum and Avalanche, their transactions will not be executed no matter how many requests are sent when the priority fee becomes insufficient, and they have to wait in line. Considering the cost of gas, such a design eliminates the possibility of network downtime arising from massive transactions at the economic level. Source[1] – Improvement by Solana Economic isolation has always served its purpose better than methodological isolation. Solana has already started to build its own Fee Market by introducing a concept similar to the priority fee. Meanwhile, Metaplex, Solana’s NFT market, will also adopt a new concept called Invalid Transaction Penalty, which means that users will have to pay a fee for invalid transactions when minting NFTs. Value capture Value capture is the reflection of a gas economy via the market cap of the gas (the native crypto of the chain). The market cap of a native coin is roughly determined by two factors: cash flow and monetary premium. – Cash flow When it comes to charging the gas fee, most public chains follow the same approach: lower the gas fee as much as possible to attract users from Ethereum. From the perspective of cash flow, such an approach is unsustainable. Of the three mainstream public chains, only Ethereum stands with a considerable net cash inflow, although the network is still issuing more Ethers. If we consider additional issuance as a type of subsidy, then the net expenditure of Ethereum per day would be about $25.7 million if the annual issuance rate stands at 3.21%. Solana and Avalanche, on the other hand, have an income of $6,250 and $42,000 a day on average, with a daily net expenditure of $4.6 million and $1.86 million and a yearly issuance rate of 6.93% and 5.22%. The high net expenditure & high issuance rate significantly dilute the market cap of the public chain coins. Source[2] Let’s turn to the destinations of cash flows. Under Ethereum’s current mechanism, the base fee is burned, while the priority fee is offered to miners. Compared with the gas burning and distribution mechanisms of Solana and Avalanche that offer the gas fee to validators, the miner reward is a design that compromises value capture. Ethereum uses the PoW design for block generation, and most of the miners adopt a business model under which tokens that have been mined are sold to cover the mining cost (such as electricity fees and maintenance costs). Therefore, the part of the gas fee paid to miners will most likely go out from the ecosystem. It would be better to give the gas fee to validators because the cost of running a node is not as high as operating a mining factory. Since there are not significant ongoing operating cost, validators are more likely to invest the rewards they’ve received in the nodes, which makes the ecosystem safer without diluting the value of the native coin. Burning fees might be the most direct and effective way to capture valuee and benefits both node stakers and token holders. In addition, MEV constitutes another major source of revenue for public chains. According to statistics from Flashbots, from 2020 to now, $600 million worth of MEV has been paid to miners, which is a conservative estimate. Source[3] – Monetary premium Monetary premium refers to the appreciation of a public chain coin in terms of its practical value and value storage. Most existing public chain coins are carrying out massive issuance, which makes them poor value storage, and the practical value forms the backbone of their market cap. The growth of the ecosystem of a public chain coin will create scenarios where it can be used as a payment method. For instance, most NFT transactions are settled with public chain coins. Meanwhile, most emerging public chains also consider the practical value as the primary means of appreciation, which is why they have set negligible gas fees to attract traffic and new users. Meanwhile, some public chains have built foundations worth hundreds of millions of dollars to encourage more developers to build DApps in their ecosystem. The logic behind such an approach is to make big investments to attract users in the initial stage and try to recover the cost later. Conclusion To sum up, the gas design of a public chain will have profound impacts on the future development of a public chain, and a poor design could lead to poor value capture and even performance bottlenecks. When evaluating a public chain project, we can also get a rough picture of its development strategy and future growth through its gas designs.   [1] https://docs.solana.com/implemented-proposals/transaction-fees#congestion-driven-fees,https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/gas/,https://docs.avax.network/quickstart/transaction-fees/ [2] https://cryptofees.info/,https://moneyprinter.info/,https://solanabeach.io/ [3] https://docs.solana.com/implemented-proposals/transaction-fees#congestion-driven-fees,https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/gas/,https://docs.avax.network/quickstart/transaction-fees/

Crypto News

Bit.com Plans to Double Workforce as Layoffs Mount in Crypto and Financial Markets

The crypto markets are going through a rough phase. Bitcoin has crashed more than 70% in 8 months. Amidst the crash, several companies are laying off their employees, desperately trying to save cash. However, not all companies are facing the hammer of fate. Bit.com, the second-largest crypto options exchange, seeks to double its workforce amidst layoffs. But why? Let’s explore. The Crypto Recession Crypto winter is frequently used in the cryptocurrency, DeFi and blockchain industry to denote the current recession that has hit the industry after it made phenomenal gains in 2021. The global economic condition, post-COVID economic losses and record inflation worldwide have led to mass layoffs in the industry. Coinbase recently trimmed off 18% of its employees to save cash. BlockFi announced the layoff of 400 employees. Crypto.com also wants to lay off a similar number of employees. However, these layoffs also bring an opportunity to hire some of the best minds in the industry. These are talented people suffering at the hands of fate. Bit.com is a full-suite cryptocurrency exchange offering spot, futures, perpetual contracts, options and savings. They are one of the top 3 exchanges for cryptocurrency options . The exchange is launched by Matrixport, which is already a Unicorn With a $1B Valuation in 2021. The exchange has its core principles built around security and risk management features. A top-grade firm, Cactus Custody, handles its security. Jihan Wu founded Matrixport in 2019 and the mining rig manufacturer Bitmain. Recently they have announced to launch USD options within the next few months as a part of their service portfolio. Bit.com hiring amid layoffs Bit.com is hiring because it is a golden opportunity. With so many qualified personnel joining the talent pool and ready to get hired at a moment’s notice, it is a dream come true for many. For example, several exchanges will be desperate to hire Coinbase employees. The reputation gives them a distinct advantage. Bit.com is taking the maximum benefit of this opportunity by hiring the best talents available in the industry. As per media reports, they are seeking to double their workforce, with a majority of the new hires to be engineers. Undoubtedly this workforce will have a majority of highly skilled employees hired at reasonable salary packages due to the ongoing market crisis. “We have experienced the ups and downs, and we also committed to the potential future. Crypto enthusiasts and experienced talents are welcome to join Bit.com” said Lan Yue, COO of Bit.com.  A drawback of such hiring could temporarily affect the company’s finances. But we can safely assume that the executives have thought about this before going on such a hiring spree. As claimed by Lan: ”Bit.com has been hiring and growing aggressively since the beginning of 2022. The recent collapse of the market has no direct impact on our original runway, we have the capacity to stick to our developing and hiring plan. Bear market may bring our users negative sentiment, it also brings us time to strenghten our product and risk management for the next bull market” A few benefits that they might derive from this hiring are, for example, that they can choose from a large, diverse talent pool. Also, they will get experienced candidates from top competitors that are difficult to get otherwise. Lastly, employees could join immediately without any notice or waiting period. Which will give Bit.com a fast push in its talent strategy. However, this could also backfire in several ways, starting from putting stress on finances. There is severe uncertainty in the US economy, a major source of capital funding for cryptocurrencies and a major market. Further, several jurisdictions have a severe regulatory crackdown on cryptocurrency companies, including high taxation (30% in India) while European countries seek a ban on the proof-of-work system. All of this, combined with high inflation, is expected to affect the buying capacity of crypto investors and traders. Conclusion The world’s economic downturn has also had a bad effect on the cryptocurrency and blockchain industry. With layoffs and cost-cutting from several big crypto companies, there is an opportunity for many companies like Bit.com to hire in good numbers. If this activity goes well with hiring, they could highly benefit from having top-of-the-line professionals in their company.