Connect with us

Blockchain

Avoiding the pointless blockchain project

Published

on

How to determine if you’ve found a real blockchain use case

Blockchains are overhyped. There, I said it. From Sibos to Money20/20 to cover stories of The Economist and Euromoney, everyone seems to be climbing aboard the blockchain wagon. And no doubt like others in the space, we’re seeing a rapidly increasing number of companies building proofs of concept on our platform and/or asking for our help.

As a young startup, you’d think we’d be over the moon. Surely now is the time to raise a ton of money and build that high performance next generation blockchain platform we’ve already designed. What on earth are we waiting for?

I’ll tell you what. We’re waiting to gain a clearer understanding of where blockchains genuinely add value in enterprise IT. You see, a large proportion of these incoming projects have nothing to do with blockchains at all. Here’s how it plays out. Big company hears that blockchains are the next big thing. Big company finds some people internally who are interested in the subject. Big company gives them a budget and tells them to go do something blockchainy. Soon enough they come knocking on our door, waving dollar bills, asking us to help them think up a use case. Say what now?

As for those who do have a project in mind, what’s the problem? In many cases, the project can be implemented perfectly well using a regular relational database. You know, big iron behemoths like Oracle and SQL Server, or for the more open-minded, MySQL and Postgres. So let me start by setting things straight:

If your requirements are fulfilled by today’s relational databases, you’d be insane to use a blockchain.

Why? Because products like Oracle and MySQL have decades of development behind them. They’ve been deployed on millions of servers running trillions of queries. They contain some of the most thoroughly tested, debugged and optimized code on the planet, processing thousands of transactions per second without breaking a sweat.

And what about blockchains? Well, our product was one of the first to market, and has been available for exactly 5 months, with a few thousand downloads. Actually it’s extremely stable, because we built it off Bitcoin Core, the software which powers bitcoin. But even so, this entire product category is still in its diapers.

So am I saying that blockchains are useless? Absolutely not. But before you embark on that shiny blockchain project, you need to have a very clear idea of why you are using a blockchain. There are a bunch of conditions that need to be fulfilled. And if they’re not, you should go back to the drawing board. Maybe you can define the project better. Or maybe you can save everyone a load of time and money, because you don’t need a blockchain at all.

1. The database

Here’s the first rule. Blockchains are a technology for shared databases. So you need to start by knowing why you are using a database, by which I mean a structured repository of information. This can be a traditional relational database, which contains one or more spreadsheet-like tables. Or it can be the trendier NoSQL variety, which works more like a file system or dictionary. (On a theoretical level, NoSQL databases are just a subset of relational databases anyway.)

A ledger for financial assets can be naturally expressed as a database table in which each row represents one asset type owned by one particular entity. Each row has three columns containing: (a) the owner’s identifier such as an account number, (b) an identifier for the asset type such as “USD” or “AAPL”, and (c) the quantity of that asset held by that owner.

Databases are modified via “transactions” which represent a set of changes to the database which must be accepted or rejected as a whole. For example, in the case of an asset ledger, a payment from one user to another is represented by a transaction that deducts the appropriate quantity from one row, and adds it to another.

2. Multiple writers

This one’s easy. Blockchains are a technology for databases with multiple writers. In other words, there needs to be more than one entity which is generating the transactions that modify the database. Do you know who these writers are?

In most cases the writers will also run “nodes” which hold a copy of the database and relay transactions to other nodes in a peer-to-peer fashion. However transactions might also be created by users who are not running a node themselves. Consider for example a payments system which is collectively maintained by a small group of banks but has millions of end users on mobile devices, communicating only with their own bank’s systems.

3. Absence of trust

And now for the third rule. If multiple entities are writing to the database, there also needs to be some degree of mistrust between those entities. In other words, blockchains are a technology for databases with multiple non-trusting writers.

You might think that mistrust only arises between separate organizations, such as the banks trading in a marketplace or the companies involved in a supply chain. But it can also exist within a single large organization, for example between departments or the operations in different countries.

What do I specifically mean by mistrust? I mean that one user is not willing to let another modify database entries which it “owns”. Similarly, when it comes to reading the database’s contents, one user will not accept as gospel the “truth” as reported by another user, because each has different economic or political incentives.

4. Disintermediation

So the problem, as defined so far, is enabling a database with multiple non-trusting writers. And there’s already a well-known solution to this problem: the trusted intermediary. That is, someone who all the writers trust, even if they don’t fully trust each other. Indeed, the world is filled with databases of this nature, such as the ledger of accounts in a bank. Your bank controls the database and ensures that every transaction is valid and authorized by the customer whose funds it moves. No matter how politely you ask, your bank will never let you modify their database directly.

Blockchains remove the need for trusted intermediaries by enabling databases with multiple non-trusting writers to be modified directly. No central gatekeeper is required to verify transactions and authenticate their source. Instead, the definition of a transaction is extended to include a proof of authorization and a proof of validity. Transactions can therefore be independently verified and processed by every node which maintains a copy of the database.

But the question you need to ask is: Do you want or need this disintermediation? Given your use case, is there anything wrong with having a central party who maintains an authoritative database and acts as the transaction gatekeeper? Good reasons to prefer a blockchain-based database over a trusted intermediary might include lower costs, faster transactions, automatic reconciliation, new regulation or a simple inability to find a suitable intermediary.

5. Transaction interaction

So blockchains make sense for databases that are shared by multiple writers who don’t entirely trust each other, and who modify that database directly. But that’s still not enough. Blockchains truly shine where there is some interaction between the transactions created by these writers.

What do I mean by interaction? In the fullest sense, this means that transactions created by different writers often depend on one other. For example, let’s say Alice sends some funds to Bob and then Bob sends some on to Charlie. In this case, Bob’s transaction is dependent on Alice’s one, and there’s no way to verify Bob’s transaction without checking Alice’s first. Because of this dependency, the transactions naturally belong together in a single shared database.

Taking this further, one nice feature of blockchains is that transactions can be created collaboratively by multiple writers, without either party exposing themselves to risk. This is what allows delivery versus payment settlement to be performed safely over a blockchain, without requiring a trusted intermediary.

A good case can also be made for situations where transactions from different writers are cross-correlated with each other, even if they remain independent. One example might be a shared identity database in which multiple entities validate different aspects of consumers’ identities. Although each such certification stands alone, the blockchain provides a useful way to bring everything together in a unified way.

6. Set the rules

This isn’t really a condition, but rather an inevitable consequence of the previous points. If we have a database modified directly by multiple writers, and those writers don’t fully trust each other, then the database must contain embedded rules restricting the transactions performed.

These rules are fundamentally different from the constraints that appear in traditional databases, because they relate to the legitimacy of transformations rather than the state of the database at a particular point in time. Every transaction is checked against these rules by every node in the network, and those that fail are rejected and not relayed on.

Asset ledgers contain a simple example of this type of rule, to prevent transactions creating assets out of thin air. The rule states that the total quantity of each asset in the ledger must be the same before and after every transaction.

7. Pick your validators

So far we’ve described a distributed database in which transactions can originate in many places, propagate between nodes in a peer-to-peer fashion, and are verified by every node independently. So where does a “blockchain” come in? Well, a blockchain’s job is to be the authoritative final transaction log, on whose contents all nodes provably agree.

Why do we need this log? First, it enables newly added nodes to calculate the database’s contents from scratch, without needing to trust another node. Second, it addresses the possibility that some nodes might miss some transactions, due to system downtime or a communications glitch. Without a transaction log, this would cause one node’s database to diverge from that of the others, undermining the goal of a shared database.

Third, it’s possible for two transactions to be in conflict, so that only one can be accepted. A classic example is a double spend in which the same asset is sent to two different recipients. In a peer-to-peer database with no central authority, nodes might have different opinions regarding which transaction to accept, because there is no objective right answer. By requiring transactions to be “confirmed” in a blockchain, we ensure that all nodes converge on the same decision.

Finally, in Ethereum-style blockchains, the precise ordering of transactions plays a crucial role, because every transaction can affect what happens in every subsequent one. In this case the blockchain acts to define the authoritative chronology, without which transactions cannot be processed at all.

A blockchain is literally a chain of blocks, in which each block contains a set of transactions that are confirmed as a group. But who is responsible for choosing the transactions that go into each block? In the kind of “private blockchain” which is suitable for enterprise applications, the answer is a closed group of validators (“miners”) who digitally sign the blocks they create. This whitelisting is combined with some form of distributed consensus scheme to prevent a minority of validators from seizing control of the chain. For example, MultiChain uses a scheme called mining diversity, in which the permitted miners work in a round-robin fashion, with some degree of leniency to allow for non-functioning nodes.

No matter which consensus scheme is used, the validating nodes have far less power than the owner of a traditional centralized database. Validators cannot fake transactions or modify the database in violation of its rules. In an asset ledger, that means they cannot spend other people’s money, nor change the total quantity of assets represented. Nonetheless there are still two ways in which validators can unduly influence a database’s contents:

  • Transaction censorship. If enough of the validators collude maliciously, they can prevent a particular transaction from being confirmed in the blockchain, leaving it permanently in limbo.
  • Biased conflict resolution. If two transactions conflict, the validator who creates the next block decides which transaction is confirmed on the blockchain, causing the other to be rejected. The fair choice would be the transaction that was seen first, but validators can choose based on other factors without revealing this.

Because of these problems, when deploying a blockchain-based database, you need to have a clear idea of who your validators are and why you trust them, collectively if not alone. Depending on the use case, the validators might be chosen as: (a) one or more nodes controlled by a single organization, (b) a core group of organizations that maintain the chain, or (c) every node on the network.

8. Back your assets

If you’ve got this far, you may have noticed that I tend to refer to blockchains as shared databases, rather than the more common “shared ledgers”. Why? Because as a technology, blockchains can be applied to problems far beyond the tracking of asset ownership. Any database which has multiple non-trusting writers can be implemented over a blockchain, without requiring a central intermediary. Examples include shared calendars, wiki-style collaboration and discussion forums.

Having said that, for now it seems that blockchains are mainly of interest to those who track the movement and exchange of financial assets. I can think of two reasons for this: (a) the finance sector is responding to the (in retrospect, minuscule) threat of cryptocurrencies like bitcoin, and (b) an asset ledger is the most simple and natural example of a shared database with interdependent transactions created by multiple non-trusting entities.

If you do want to use a blockchain as an asset ledger, you need to answer one additional crucial question: What is the nature of the assets being moved around? By this I don’t just mean cash or bonds or bills of lading, though of course that’s important as well. The question is rather: Who stands behind the assets represented on the blockchain? If the database says that I own 10 units of something, who will allow me to claim those 10 units in the real world? Who do I sue if I can’t convert what’s written in the blockchain into traditional physical assets? (See this asset agreement for an example.)

The answer, of course, will vary by the use case. For monetary assets, one can imagine custodial banks accepting cash in traditional form, and then crediting the accounts of depositors in a blockchain-powered distributed ledger. In trade finance, letters of credit and bills of lading would be backed by the importer’s bank and the shipping company respectively. And further in the future, we can imagine a time when the primary issuance of corporate bonds takes place directly on a blockchain by the company seeking to raise funds.

Conclusion

As I mentioned in the introduction, if your project does not fulfill every single one of these conditions, you should not be using a blockchain. In the absence of any of the first five, you should consider one of: (a) regular file storage, (b) a centralized database, (c) master–slave database replication, or (d) multiple databases to which users can subscribe.

And if you do fulfill the first five, there’s still work to do. You need to be able to express the rules of your application in terms of the transactions which a database allows. You need to be confident about who you can trust as validators and how you’ll define distributed consensus. And finally, if you’re looking at creating a shared ledger, you need to know who will be backing the assets which that ledger represents.

Got all the answers? Congratulations, you have a real blockchain use case. And we’d love to hear from you.

Please post any comments on LinkedIn. See also this follow up: Four genuine blockchain use cases.

Source: https://www.multichain.com/blog/2015/11/avoiding-pointless-blockchain-project/

Blockchain

Bitcoin Sees Largest Exchange Inflows Since March 2020 Crash

Another bearish signal for Bitcoin as the cryptocurrency sees the largest exchange inflows from external wallets last seen in March 2020.

Published

on

Table of Contents

Rate this post

Another bearish signal for Bitcoin has been looming around the corner with the digital asset seeing the largest inflows from external wallets to spot exchanges last seen in March 2020, signifying investors are ready to sell-off their holdings.

Bitcoin Sees the Highest Daily Spike in Exchange Inflows

Having already lost over 50% of its value from its all-time high in just two months, numerous technical indicators are signaling Bitcoin towards even more adverse price reactions.

Following reports of the digital asset crossing the much-dreaded “death cross”, new on-chain data reveals that investors are depositing massive portions of their holdings to exchanges in order to cash out their holdings.

READ  Gazprom’s Oil Unit Opens Crypto Mining Farm at One of Its Drilling Sites

For instance, data from CryptoQuant shows that on June 21 Bitcoin saw the highest daily spike in inflows from external wallets to spot exchanges, last seen during the COVID-19 induced March 2020 crash, that took the cryptocurrency to as low as $3,000.

Even though the leading cryptocurrency has recovered more than $10,000 from the previous weeks, the digital asset has indeed weakened due to China’s brutal crypto crackdown.

Stablecoin Inflows Drop Considerably

At the same time, data from CryptoQuant indicates that the stablecoin inflows to exchanges seem to have dropped as investors turn bearish on Bitcoin.

For instance, during the first five months of the year, the circulating supply of stablecoins was on a steady rise and accelerated somewhat as the market sold off in May. However, stablecoin issuance came to a standstill at the beginning of June as bearish trends took over the Bitcoin market.

READ  Altcoins Notch Multi-Year Highs as Bitcoin Price Move Towards $60K

Since then, stablecoin inflows to exchanges have fallen to their lowest level last seen in October 2020.

Usually, stablecoin inflows are viewed as bullish catalysts. However, CryptoQuant’s recent newsletter warns of similar spikes in stablecoin issuance in the past followed by a prolonged price declines:

 “After the bottom of the last bear market (2018-2019), we saw a steady rise in issuance events. At the top (June 28, 2019) of this bullish period, there was a large issuance event (the two big spikes in July-August 2019 are due to USDT ETH issuance). It looks like the same is happening right now.”

#Bitcoin #Bitcoin Inflows

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://www.cryptoknowmics.com/news/bitcoin-sees-largest-exchange-inflows-since-march-2020-crash

Continue Reading

Blockchain

Dogecoin Gets Hit the Hardest Among Top 10 Coins, Plunges Over 20%

Dogecoin has gotten hit the hardest among the top 10 coins and saw its second-worst day of the year on June 22 by plunging down over 36% to $0.17.

Published

on

Table of Contents

Rate this post

Meme-based cryptocurrency Dogecoin gets hit the hardest among the top 10 coins and saw its second-worst day of the year on June 22 by plunging down over 36% to $0.17, the lowest level since Apr. 23.

Dogecoin Gets Hit the Hardest Among Top 10 Coins

On May 19, joke cryptocurrency Dogecoin shed over 55% within a single day, but it managed to climb back to almost half of the losses before the daily close.

The meme-based coin is currently trading 77% lower since May 8, from its current all-time high of $0.74 on May 8. The market cap, which was $34.97 billion on June 21, has now slid down to $27.22B in just the last 24 hours.

READ  Crypto Market Hits $200 Billion, Bitcoin Rallies To $7K: BCH, LTC, EOS, ADA Analysis

Dogecoin is currently the biggest loser among the top 10 cryptocurrencies, plunging over 20%, despite major altcoins like XRP, Binance Coin, and Polkadot experiencing double-digit losses.

The value of popular cryptocurrencies remained weak on June 22 after the crypto market witnessed a massive crash a day earlier, following China’s intensified crackdown on Bitcoin.

Over the bigger picture, Dogecoin looks weak that needs upside catalysts to rebound from current levels.

For instance, if Dogecoin declines below the support at $0.25, it will head towards the next support level at $0.2250. A successful test of the support at $0.2250 will push the cryptocurrency towards the next support at $0.2150.

Dogecoin-Branded NASCAR Crashes Like DOGE

Stefan Parsons’ car emblazoned with the Dogecoin logo crashed into the wall during Stage 2 at Nashville Superspeedway on June 19th. Fans of meme-based cryptocurrency fans pushed the hashtag #dogecar trend on Twitter.

READ  Vitalik Buterin Reveals Making $4.3M from $25,000 Investment in Dogecoin

The car was sponsored by Springates, a manufacturer of auto parts whose CEO is a DOGE enthusiast. Parson escaped unhurt but the value of the cryptocurrency did not.

DOGE has a long history on the NASCAR tracks. In April 2014, for instance, Dogecoin fans raised 68 million DOGE worth about $42,000 at the time, via a Reddit campaign to sponsor Josh Wise’s Ford Fusion car. Interestingly, Wise raced in the same team as Stefan Parsons’ father Phil.

#DOGE #Dogecoin

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://www.cryptoknowmics.com/news/dogecoin-gets-hit-the-hardest-among-top-10-coins-plunges-over-20

Continue Reading

Blockchain

VanEck to Launch a Mutual Fund that Invests in BTC Futures

Global investment manager VanEck has recently filed an introductory prospectus to launch a mutual fund that put its money into BTC Futures.

Published

on

Table of Contents

Rate this post

Global investment manager VanEck has recently filed an introductory prospectus to launch a mutual fund that put its money into BTC Futures through its Cayman Islands-based subordinate. Rest, it has been revealed that the fund may also put some of its unsettled assets into the United States treasuries. 

VanEck to Initiate a Mutual Fund That Invests in BTC Futures

The Bitcoin Strategy Fund is not going to have any exposure to the spot price of the top crypto asset and it said:

“The Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing, under normal circumstances, in bitcoin futures contracts (“Bitcoin Futures”), as well as pooled investment vehicles and exchange-traded products that provide exposure to bitcoin (together with Bitcoin Futures, “Bitcoin Investments”). The Fund does not invest in bitcoin or other digital assets directly.”

In addition to this, it has already been reported that the global investment manager VanEck has filed requisitions for both Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs earlier this year.

However, the United States Securities and Exchange have not approved any of them as of yet. 

Moreover, the SEC has initiated the process of looking for additional comments to affirm whether or not it should checklist the Bitcoin ETF proposal of VanEck.

Mike Novogratz Comments on China Crypto Crackdown

The CEO of Galaxy Digital, Michael Novogratz has recently released a statement sharing his opinion on the effect of the ongoing China crackdown on crypto.

Novogratz took it to Twitter and said:

“China news isn’t good. Xi is an authoritarian leader who wants control over things. $BTC is the opposite of authoritarianism. Chinese citizens will always find a way to move assets outside the system but they are making it harder. Will take some time to play out. Keep the faith.”

Novogratz is sure that the Chinese Crypto owners will be able to shift their assets outside China, but it will take some time.

READ  Block.One Social Media Platform Voice Announces its Launch

#BTC futures #Mutual Fund #VanEck

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://www.cryptoknowmics.com/news/vaneck-to-launch-a-mutual-fund-that-invests-in-btc-futures

Continue Reading

Blockchain

Yearn Finance (YFI) and Synthetix (SNX) Technical Analysis: What to Expect?

Synthetix and Yearn Finance are sinking. If $7 falls, SNX/USDT may halve to $4—or worse. Meanwhile, YFI/USDT is on the cusp of falling further to $26k.

Published

on

Table of Contents

Rate this post

Synthetix and Yearn Finance are sinking. If $7 falls, SNX/USDT may halve to $4—or worse. Meanwhile, YFI/USDT is on the cusp of falling further to $26k.

Yearn Finance (YFI)

The automated aggregator allows DeFi investors to draw maximum yields from various protocols. YFI is central to the platform.

Past Performance of YFI

The YFI/USDT is still under the shadow of sellers who dominated in the second half of May 2021.

Bears are in control, and liquidation across the board may flatten out attempts to revive bulls.

Presently, YFI is down nine percent against the USD and ETH on the last trading day.

READ  BaFin Eases Licensing Process For Foreign Crypto Custodians 

Day-Ahead and what to Expect

The path of least resistance is southwards.

Although Ethereum’s fundamentals might rejuvenate YFI/USDT price action, candlestick arrangement, and BTC weakness combine to deflate optimistic bulls.

YFI bear bars are banding along with the lower BB, signaling selling pressure below $40k and the middle BB.

YFI/USDT Technical Analysis

YFI Price Daily Chart for June 22

Losses of June 21 were perpendicular, pointing to sellers’ convictions.

Accordingly, every high may present a selling opportunity for YFI/USDT bears, targeting $26k or May 2021 lows.

Unexpected gains from spot levels, preferably with high trading volumes, reversing June 21 losses may trigger a revival with targets at $40k for YFI.

Conversely, further dumps firmly place YFI/USDT price action to sellers.

Synthetix (SNX)

The decentralized derivatives trading DeFi protocol uses SNX as its token. In addition, the platform plans to adopt Optimism as its Layer-2 scaling option.

READ  COTI and Avalanche (AVAX) Technical Analysis: What to Expect?

Past Performance of SNX

SNX sellers have reversed over 80 percent of gains made during the steep increase from November 2020 to 2021 peaks of February 2021.

Losses may continue considering the state of price action, favoring sellers.

SNX is down double-digits as of writing, falling 11 percent against the USD on the last trading day.

Meanwhile, trading volumes rose to $78 million, suggesting possible offloading.

Day-Ahead and what to Expect

SNX sellers, based on price action in the daily chart, are motoring ahead.

At spot rates, dips below $7 confirming June 21 draw-down may see another dump down towards $4—visible reaction points of November and December 2021.

SNX/USDT Technical Analysis

SNX Price Daily Chart for June 22

Confirmation of SNX/USDT bear bar of June 21 below $7 could cement sellers’ conviction.

READ  4 Reasons to Scrutinize BuyCrypto.today Before Using the Service

In that case, SNX prices may halve to $4.

Conversely, suppose prices find support at spot rates, reversing June 21 losses despite the intense selling pressure. In that case, SNX could lift off above $8 to $14 in the medium term.

#DeFi #SNX #SNX/USDT #Synthetix #Yearn.finance #YFI #YFI/USDT

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://www.cryptoknowmics.com/news/yearn-finance-yfi-and-synthetix-snx-technical-analysis-what-to-expect

Continue Reading
Esports17 mins ago

4 Shurima cards revealed for Legends of Runeterra’s Rise of the Underworld expansion

Energy27 mins ago

Orion Metal Exchange Extends “Fee Free Precious Metal Buyback Program”

Energy30 mins ago

American Made Tactical Supports US Job Creation To Help Keep America Working

Esports33 mins ago

VCT Stage 3 predictions: What we expect from the final stretch of VALORANT’s first circuit

Esports36 mins ago

ACNH Warm Painting: Everything You Need to Know

Esports36 mins ago

VALORANT’s Episode 3: Reflection and KAY/O are now live

Esports37 mins ago

Emboar Blast Burn Pokemon GO: How to Get Blast Burn for Emboar

Esports38 mins ago

Tepig Community Day Pokemon GO Guide

Energy39 mins ago

Solis reconocida mundialmente con el sello “Top PV Brand 2021” para inversores

Esports40 mins ago

Dungeons & Dragons: Dark Alliance Voice Actors: Who Voices Utaar?

Esports41 mins ago

Janna player uses ultimate to wipe out 5 enemies in League’s Nexus Blitz mode

Energy44 mins ago

Worldwide Wire and Cable Materials Industry to 2030 – Key Drivers, Restraints and Opportunities

Cleantech53 mins ago

1366 Technologies To Invest $300 Million In Solar Module Production In India

Aviation53 mins ago

Europe’s Stored Aircraft Reach A Pandemic Era Record Low

Energy56 mins ago

El sector de la maquinaria de trabajo aéreo de XCMG ocupa ahora el sexto lugar a nivel mundial

Big Data58 mins ago

Amazing Low-Code Machine Learning Capabilities with New Ludwig Update

Energy60 mins ago

A Eastman expande seu portfólio de soluções sustentáveis com a resina reciclável Cristal™ para cosméticos.

Energy1 hour ago

Gates Expands Thermoplastic Polyurethane Line-up with Best-in-Class Parabolic Pitch Belts

Cleantech1 hour ago

Kia Shows Us How Hybrids Are Changing & Improving, Leading To More EVs

Blockchain1 hour ago

Bitcoin Sees Largest Exchange Inflows Since March 2020 Crash

Aviation1 hour ago

United States Unlocked: The Country’s Top 15 Routes

Esports2 hours ago

Niantic Labs Reveals Roadmap for Removing Pandemic Bonuses in Pokemon GO

Belarus
Esports2 hours ago

StarLadder CIS RMR groups and schedule revealed

Cleantech2 hours ago

Pope Gets a New LEAF in His EV Fleet

Aviation2 hours ago

Virgin Atlantic Celebrates 37 Years After A Really Bad One

CNBC2 hours ago

Tide is making the first laundry detergent for space

Crowdfunding2 hours ago

Financial Technology Association Creates Advisory Board, Adds Top Fintech Experts to Guide Strategy

EdTech2 hours ago

Merlyn Mind emerges from stealth with $29M and a hardware and software solution to help teachers with tech

AR/VR2 hours ago

Haptics Use Cases and Applications in VR: Training

AR/VR2 hours ago

Larcenauts -An amusing heroshooter with weaknesses and bugs

Trending