January 25, 2026

Capitalizations Index – B ∞/21M

Bitcoin: 2008 Creation by Pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto

Bitcoin: 2008 creation by pseudonymous satoshi nakamoto

In 2008 a⁤ person ‍or group writing under ​the⁤ pseudonym‍ Satoshi‍ Nakamoto published a whitepaper that‍ introduced bitcoin, a ⁤novel form of digital money⁢ and the‍ protocol that supports it. Designed as a peer-to-peer electronic payment system ‍that operates without ⁣a central‌ authority, bitcoin is ⁢implemented as open‑source⁣ software and relies on⁣ a⁤ distributed ⁣network to‍ validate⁣ transactions⁣ and manage issuance collectively[[3]][[2]].Its⁤ architecture replaces traditional intermediaries with a public, append‑only ​ledger and ‍consensus mechanisms⁢ that create digital‍ scarcity and ‌enable permissionless transfer of value.​ Since those origins, client software ⁢and‌ wallets-such‌ as implementations of ‌bitcoin Core and other programs-have ⁤allowed users to run nodes, store funds, and⁢ participate directly in ⁤the network[[1]][[2]].

Origins of bitcoin and the Whitepaper Authored by Satoshi Nakamoto

Satoshi ⁣Nakamoto introduced a radical⁤ proposal in 2008‍ that reframed⁤ digital money ⁤as a trustless, distributed system secured by cryptography and economic‌ incentives. That‍ proposal ⁤- a concise technical ​document outlining how a peer-to-peer electronic payment system⁣ could⁤ eliminate the need for ⁤centralized intermediaries – laid the ⁤conceptual‌ foundation for what became bitcoin. The ‍model described​ a network where ‌transactions ‌are publicly ⁣verifiable and ordered ⁣without ⁤trusting a single authority, reflecting the core definition of⁤ bitcoin as a ⁤peer-to-peer electronic payment⁤ system [[2]].

The whitepaper distilled several key ⁣technical innovations that together ⁣solved longstanding problems in digital cash:

  • Decentralized ledger: an append-only chain of ‍blocks recording ⁢all transactions.
  • Proof-of-work: ⁣ a computational cost ‍that secures block ‍creation and​ prevents double-spending.
  • Peer validation: ⁤self-reliant nodes that ⁤validate and ​propagate transactions and ​blocks.
  • Incentive alignment: issuance and⁢ rewards⁢ to motivate honest participation.

These elements formed a cohesive protocol ‍design that enabled‌ secure, permissionless​ transfer of value without ‍centralized control [[3]].

Shortly after the paper circulated, reference software implementing the design‍ was released and the ecosystem began‌ to grow; running a full ‍node to participate in validation requires a ‍complete ⁣copy of the ledger and can demand significant bandwidth and storage during initial synchronization – users were⁣ advised to ‍use tools like bootstrap.dat to accelerate that process when ⁢available [[1]]. ​the project’s‍ open-source nature encouraged community review, independent implementations, and ongoing protocol growth, turning a single research ​paper into ⁣a persistent, decentralized network.

Year Milestone
2008 Whitepaper published
2009 Reference software & network launch

Cryptographic innovations⁣ introduced in the bitcoin whitepaper

Cryptographic Innovations Introduced⁤ in the bitcoin Whitepaper

bitcoin’s 2008 ‌blueprint packaged well‑known cryptographic primitives into a single, functional system: digital signatures to prove ownership​ of⁣ coins, cryptographic hash functions⁢ to ​link ⁢data and order events,⁣ and a proof‑of‑work consensus to make history⁢ costly to rewrite. the whitepaper describes how transactions are signed ⁣and propagated, how blocks​ contain a cryptographic pointer to​ the previous block to ⁤create an ‌immutable chain, and how‌ computational work secures the ledger‌ against tampering and double‑spending -⁢ all ⁤core ideas that turned abstract ⁤cryptography ‌into a ⁤practical,⁤ decentralized payment⁤ system [[1]].

  • Digital⁣ signatures (ownership) -‍ users sign transactions to transfer​ funds ⁢without revealing private keys.
  • Hash chaining (integrity) ⁣- each block references the previous block’s ‌hash,​ making alteration ⁣detectable.
  • Proof‑of‑Work ⁢(consensus) ‌- a difficulty‑adjusted​ computational⁢ puzzle prevents sybil attacks and⁤ establishes objective history.
  • Merkle‍ trees (efficiency) ⁣ – compact proofs of membership let nodes verify transactions without full data.
  • Timestamping (ordering) ⁤- a ‌distributed timestamp server​ gives transactions ‌a verifiable place in ⁢history.

The combination of‌ these innovations yields three practical​ guarantees: authenticity (only the​ holder⁢ of a private key can spend funds), immutability (rewriting ​history requires prohibitive ​work), and scalability​ of verification (light clients can⁣ validate with Merkle proofs). The table‍ below summarizes key mechanisms and their cryptographic⁢ purpose‍ in concise form:

Innovation Purpose
Digital Signatures Prove‌ ownership and authorize ​transfers
Hash‑Chained ‍Blocks Detect tampering⁣ and ensure order
Proof‑of‑Work Secure ‍consensus and⁣ prevent⁣ double‑spend

How ⁣bitcoin Addresses Double Spending Through⁤ Proof of Work and Decentralization

Proof of work makes reversing transactions ‍costly: ⁤every confirmed‍ transaction is embedded into a block that required ample computational effort to ​produce,⁢ and ⁢any ‌attempt to ⁤spend the ⁢same coins twice must⁤ outpace the cumulative work ⁣of honest miners. Becuase blocks​ are ⁣chained by hashes, an⁤ attacker who wants to rewrite​ history must re-mine the target block‍ and all subsequent blocks faster than the rest ⁢of the network – a ⁣requirement that grows‌ exponentially expensive as more blocks are added.full⁤ nodes independently ‌download‌ and validate ⁤the ⁢entire chain, ‌rejecting any history that ⁤lacks the most cumulative proof-of-work,​ which is why running​ a validating client‌ is central ⁤to resisting ​double-spend ⁣attempts [[1]].

Decentralization⁣ multiplies defense layers: no single⁤ party controls which transactions become final, and consensus emerges from broad agreement among ⁢many participants. Key mechanisms include:

  • Miners expend cost: economic and energy ⁣costs​ deter attackers⁤ from ⁤producing competing ​chains.
  • Independent nodes⁣ enforce ⁢rules: ​every node ​verifies ⁤transactions and blocks against protocol rules, rejecting invalid or conflicting histories.
  • Confirmations build ​finality: each‍ additional block ⁤makes a ⁢past transaction ⁣harder to reverse, shifting ⁣risk from probabilistic to practically negligible.

Together these factors transform double-spend from a trivial software bug into an economically infeasible⁢ assault.

In practice, risk is managed by waiting for confirmations: ⁤the more ⁢confirmations, the higher the ​cumulative‍ work protecting⁤ a transaction. Below is⁢ a‌ concise reference to‍ the typical relationship between confirmations and attack risk – useful for merchants and ⁤users evaluating‍ acceptable exposure. ‌The bitcoin project’s community-driven development​ and widespread node deployment underpin this security model by keeping the validation logic public ‌and verifiable ⁣ [[3]].

Confirmations Risk Attacker Effort
0 High Trivial
1-5 moderate Significant
6+ Low Economic/Impractical

The ⁣Genesis Block, ‍Early‌ Network Development and the Pseudonymous Creator

the genesis‌ block, ⁤mined on january ​3,​ 2009, contains an embedded ‍headline that served both‍ as⁤ a timestamp and​ a political statement: “The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.” this inaugural ‌block created the initial supply of ‌50 BTC (the block⁢ subsidy) and established⁣ the⁣ immutable ⁣first link ⁤in bitcoin’s public ledger; the genesis reward⁢ itself is ‍effectively unspendable due to how the block was constructed. The system’s core design ‍- a permissionless,‌ proof‑of‑work chain that enforces consensus without a central⁢ authority -⁣ was implemented by a⁤ single pseudonymous author⁢ who introduced the protocol and the reference client to the⁢ world. [[1]]

Early network development ⁢was ⁤a small, deliberate ⁤process: the first ⁤nodes were run by cryptography ⁣enthusiasts and early adopters, and early patches and improvements were‌ coordinated through mailing lists and code commits. Key milestones⁢ include the whitepaper⁢ release ‌in October 2008, the⁢ genesis block in January 2009, and ​the first peer‑to‑peer transactions that followed.Vital early ⁤contributors helped bootstrap the ‍network ‍while the protocol matured through incremental changes. Examples of foundational​ steps include:

  • Whitepaper ⁢published – October 2008
  • Genesis block mined – January 2009
  • First transactions and‌ test mining – 2009

inside the⁢ first months, collaborative debugging and small feature additions shaped the resilient peer network that would grow into a‌ global ledger. [[2]]

The creator’s ⁤choice‌ to‌ remain pseudonymous-using‌ the‌ name Satoshi Nakamoto-is part of bitcoin’s foundational narrative and has practical consequences: it prevented centralization of ​authority, focused attention on the⁢ protocol⁣ rather than a person, and left ‌a lasting question about authorship. ‌Satoshi‍ communicated with early developers ⁢and users, then⁣ gradually reduced⁢ activity, handing development responsibilities to others and effectively stepping‌ back by 2010.Debate ‍about identity ⁣and intent ‍persists, but⁣ the design and early​ stewardship established the principles⁤ of ⁣clarity, ‍open‑source collaboration, and network ​resilience that continue ⁣to guide ⁢the project. [[3]]

Design Motivations​ and Economic⁤ Principles Underpinning ​bitcoin

bitcoin was engineered to​ replace intermediated settlement with​ a‌ peer-to-peer monetary network⁤ that minimizes trust in third parties and resists censorship.​ Its architecture addresses the‌ double-spend⁢ problem and enables ⁤direct value transfer between parties without ⁤banks or payment processors,preserving integrity‌ through a shared⁤ public‍ ledger and ‌cryptographic proofs. This basic⁢ peer-to-peer design ​underpins bitcoin’s role as a global, permissionless payment system ‍and is described in mainstream ‌project documentation⁣ and downloads for bitcoin software ⁢ [[2]].

The economic design rests on a handful ‌of clear, ​intentional principles intended ⁢to produce predictable ⁣monetary behavior‍ and⁣ align‍ participant incentives. Key ⁢features include⁢ fixed supply to limit inflationary issuance, proof-of-work to ⁤secure‌ consensus, and‌ miner compensation that ⁤ties block production to network ⁣security. Economically relevant⁣ elements can‍ be⁤ summarized as:

  • Scarcity: capped issuance schedule to create scarcity and predictable supply growth.
  • Incentives: block rewards ​and fees that ‍economically secure the network.
  • Decentralization: distribution of validation power to ⁣reduce single⁤ points of⁤ control.

These mechanisms produce emergent properties-such as‍ network effects,⁢ liquidity accumulation, and a store-of-value narrative-while the open development‌ community and forums continue⁤ to refine ‌trade-offs between scalability, privacy, and resilience. The project’s community-driven evolution‌ and technical ⁣discussion remain ⁤central to ⁣how economic rules‌ are interpreted and implemented across software clients and infrastructure ⁤ [[3]]. Below is​ a compact⁢ reference table illustrating‍ primary principles‌ and their intended⁤ economic impact:

Principle Intended Impact
Scarcity Deflationary ⁢pressure / store of ⁢value
Proof-of-Work Costly security / Sybil resistance
Open Protocol Interoperability / decentralised governance

Security, Privacy and Technical Limitations Identified Since Launch

Security failures⁤ have tended to reflect operational weaknesses more than protocol design flaws: losses from custodial breaches, wallet mismanagement, ⁢and phishing remain the dominant causes of user funds being stolen, while‍ attacks ⁣on the consensus layer⁣ (for example, a sustained majority-mining event) ​are ⁤theoretically possible but practically arduous and costly. ⁣Key risk​ categories include:

  • Custody ‍& key security: single-key loss/theft and ⁣poor backup⁢ practices.
  • Exchange and custodial compromise: centralized platforms ⁤as hotbeds for large-scale theft.
  • Mining‍ centralization: ‍ concentration of hashpower raising theoretical 51%⁢ risks.

[[1]]

Privacy ⁢limitations arise from the blockchain’s transparency and metadata leakage, while technical constraints shape practical adoption: every on-chain transaction‍ permanently records addresses and⁤ values, enabling clustering heuristics and chain-analysis firms⁤ to link ​activity⁣ to ‍identities;‍ off-chain tools ⁢reduce but do ⁢not wholly eliminate exposure. Common privacy and technical ‌trade-offs⁢ are ⁢shown​ below:

Issue Effect Typical Mitigation
Transparent ledger Address linking, forensic tracing CoinJoin, privacy wallets
Large blockchain size High storage ⁤and sync time‍ for full nodes Pruned nodes, SPV clients
On-chain fees Variable ‌confirmation ⁤costs during⁤ congestion fee estimation, Layer-2 payments

[[2]]

scalability and resource requirements continue to impose trade-offs between decentralization and usability: limited block size and average throughput constrain native transaction capacity,‌ pushing many use cases to​ Layer‑2 protocols, while running a full validating⁣ node still demands bandwidth and storage-factors that influence who can‌ participate fully in network security. Practical responses include:

  • Layer‑2 scaling: payment channels ‍and off-chain settlement to increase ⁢throughput.
  • Node optimizations: ⁢pruning,‌ compact⁢ block relay, and ‌SPV/light ​wallets to lower ⁤resource barriers.
  • Wallet selection: choosing custody‌ and client types to balance privacy,security,and convenience.

[[3]] [[2]]

Key Lessons ⁤for Developers, Researchers and Policymakers

Design⁣ and incentive ​structures matter more than feature lists. bitcoin’s core innovations – a peer-to-peer ledger, cryptographic validation, and economic⁢ incentives – show ‌that protocols ⁤succeed when they align technical properties⁢ with participant⁣ incentives and resist central points of failure. Emphasize modular, auditable​ code, ⁢deterministic‌ consensus‌ rules, and reproducible experiments so systems remain resilient as they scale [[3]].

Operational ⁤realities ⁢drive developer priorities: plan for‍ storage, ​bandwidth ⁤and⁤ long-term maintenance from day one. Initial⁢ synchronization and ‍the full blockchain footprint are non-trivial operational ‌constraints that ⁢affect onboarding, testing and user​ experience -‌ ensure ​toolchains ​and documentation accommodate them [[2]] [[1]].

  • Implement robust testing on ⁣mainnet-like datasets and lightweight‍ simulators.
  • Prioritize ⁣clear ​upgrade⁤ paths and backward-compatible changes.
  • Document assumptions for‍ threat models and economic incentives.
Stakeholder Immediate Focus
Developers Deterministic builds & audits
Researchers Reproducible metrics
Policymakers Clear,principles-based regulation

Policy ⁢and research should be evidence-driven ​and⁢ technically literate. ‌ Regulators gain more by understanding system trade-offs ‍- privacy vs. auditability, ‍decentralization vs. performance⁢ – than by‍ reacting to ⁤singular events. support standardized data sharing ⁤(privacy-preserving where appropriate), ‌fund longitudinal studies of ⁣protocol economics, and build regulatory frameworks that encourage innovation while mitigating systemic risk. ‍For‍ all stakeholders, continuous ⁣collaboration ‍between engineers,⁣ economists ⁢and legal experts produces more practical, durable outcomes [[3]].

Practical⁢ Security⁤ and Usage Recommendations for Individual bitcoin Holders

Prioritize key control and ⁢layered defenses: use a‍ hardware wallet for long-term holdings and keep the seed phrase​ offline and ‌protected (paper or metal backups stored separately). Implement multi-signature ⁣setups for larger balances and⁣ split holdings between a cold-storage⁤ wallet and a small⁣ hot ‍wallet for daily‍ use. Regularly update wallet software and only download bitcoin⁣ Core ‌or other full-node⁣ clients from‍ official sources; note that initial blockchain​ synchronization ⁤can be lengthy and requires significant disk space-consider using a bootstrap file or torrent to accelerate sync if you understand the process ‌ [[1]][[3]].

Practical habits ⁢to reduce operational risk:

  • Verify software‍ and URLs: ⁢check⁣ signatures and hashes ​before ​installing wallets or ‍nodes.
  • Split roles: ‌ separate signing devices from online devices ‍to limit exposure.
  • Use address hygiene: generate new receiving addresses for privacy and enable‌ coin-control where available.

Use reputable, open-source wallets⁢ and prefer self-custody over custodial services​ when you‍ can manage keys securely. Swift‌ comparison:

Option Security Profile Best for
Hardware wallet High Long-term​ self-custody
Multisig Very high Shared custody/organizations
Custodial ⁢service Variable Convenience/trading

Prepare for⁤ recovery and‌ incidents: keep at least⁤ two verified, geographically separated backups of seed phrases⁤ or encrypted wallet files and test recovery procedures‍ on a​ secondary device before‌ relying on them. ‍If‍ you suspect compromise, promptly move remaining funds‍ to new keys generated on an uncompromised device​ and use‌ watch-only addresses to monitor for ⁢unexpected activity. For full-node users, consult official download and localization‌ pages to ensure you have correct client versions and ​guidance in your language [[2]][[1]].

Responsible ⁤Approaches to Scaling, Governance and ‌Regulatory ‌Engagement

Conservative, well-audited ⁤upgrades must ⁣guide any changes ⁤to⁣ bitcoin’s protocol. Prioritizing backward-compatible‌ improvements and rigorous peer‍ review preserves network stability and the ‌trust ‍of node operators. The project’s community-driven, open-source development model encourages ‌transparent discussion and reproducible testing before‌ deployment, with ​production clients and release assets distributed through established channels to reduce​ fragmentation and‌ supply-chain risk[[1]].

Practical governance combines⁢ technical restraint with clear, repeatable processes. Best practices include:

  • Extensive test suites and staged release cycles.
  • Open specification proposals ​and broad community‍ review (bips/bxps or ‍equivalent).
  • Incentive-aligned rollouts that respect miner, node and wallet operator ⁢economies.
  • Layered ‍scaling ‍that favors off-chain solutions when ⁤appropriate and on-chain efficiency where needed.

Maintaining a diverse ecosystem‌ of wallets, ⁢clients and ⁣infrastructure providers strengthens resilience and helps balance innovation with operational safety[[2]].

Priority Responsible approach
Security Conservative defaults,⁢ slow opt-in upgrades
Scalability Layered solutions, fee-market awareness
Decentralization Minimize single-vendor dependencies

Engagement with‌ regulators ‍should be‌ proactive and factual: ⁤explain technical realities, advocate ⁤for⁣ proportionate rules that ⁢address illicit finance while preserving privacy and permissionless innovation, and offer multi‑language​ documentation and client distribution​ to support global interoperability[[3]].

Q&A

Q: What is bitcoin?
A:‌ bitcoin is ‌a⁣ decentralized, peer-to-peer ​digital currency ⁢and payment⁣ system that enables value ⁣transfer⁢ without a central intermediary. It uses a distributed ledger​ (the blockchain) to record transactions and cryptographic techniques to secure and‌ validate them. [[2]][[3]]

Q: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?
A: Satoshi Nakamoto is the pseudonymous individual or⁣ group⁤ who authored bitcoin’s original whitepaper and created⁣ the first bitcoin software. The ⁣true identity behind the name ⁢remains unknown; Satoshi⁣ communicated ⁣with early ⁢developers under the pseudonym before gradually withdrawing from public involvement.

Q: When was bitcoin created?
A: The ⁣bitcoin whitepaper ​was published in ⁢2008. ⁢The software‍ and network came online soon after: the ⁣genesis (first) block‌ of the bitcoin⁣ blockchain was ⁤mined in ‌early January 2009,⁤ marking⁢ the launch⁤ of the live network.

Q: What did Satoshi ‍publish in 2008?
A: ⁤Satoshi ⁢published the ​paper “bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer ⁣Electronic Cash system,” ⁤which described⁤ a design combining a peer-to-peer network,a public⁢ ledger (blockchain),and a proof-of-work ⁣consensus ⁤mechanism to prevent double-spending without a central authority.

Q: How ⁤does bitcoin work⁤ at a high level?
A: ⁣bitcoin transactions are broadcast to a peer-to-peer network. miners collect transactions into blocks and perform⁤ proof-of-work computations to add a block to⁣ the blockchain.Once a block is​ accepted, its transactions are considered confirmed. The blockchain is a public, ⁣tamper-evident ledger replicated across many ⁤nodes.

Q: What⁣ is the meaning of the genesis block?
A: The genesis‌ block is the⁢ first ⁢block in bitcoin’s blockchain; it‍ established the initial state of the ledger and ⁤contained symbolic content embedded by Satoshi. It is ⁤indeed ​considered the technical ⁤and historical starting point of the bitcoin network.

Q: Why did satoshi use a pseudonym?
A: Reasons commonly ​cited include privacy, security, ⁢and​ to​ minimize legal ⁤and ‌political ⁣exposure. Using ⁢a pseudonym also focused attention on the technology and ‌protocol ⁢rather than the​ person(s) behind it.

Q: Has Satoshi​ Nakamoto ever⁤ been definitively identified?
A: No definitive, ‌universally ‍accepted identification has been established. Various individuals have been​ proposed as Satoshi, but none have been ‌conclusively proven to be the ​author in a way⁢ that convinces‍ the broader community.

Q: What happened to bitcoin ‌development after⁣ Satoshi withdrew?
A: ​Development ‍continued as an ​open-source, community-driven project. Contributors and maintainers coordinated ‍improvements, audits, and ​releases; the ⁤reference implementation evolved ⁣under collaborative governance by developers, researchers, ‌and ecosystem participants. The core ⁢bitcoin software remains available and maintained by the community. [[1]]

Q: What is bitcoin Core and ⁢where can ⁣I ​obtain it?
A: bitcoin Core ⁤is the widely used reference ‍implementation of bitcoin’s full-node software, maintained by ⁢an‌ open-source community. Official builds and downloads⁣ are published for⁢ users ⁣who‌ want ⁢to run ‌a⁤ full node or participate‌ in network ‍validation. ⁤Official download ‌details is​ available‌ from bitcoin project resources.⁣ [[1]][[2]]

Q: ‌What are the ​broader‌ impacts of bitcoin’s creation?
A: bitcoin introduced a practical decentralized monetary ‍protocol and spurred innovation across ‌cryptography,distributed systems,and finance.‍ It ‍prompted new‍ markets,⁤ regulatory ⁢discussions,‍ and technological⁤ ecosystems (wallets, exchanges, layer‑2 systems), and influenced research into decentralized consensus and digital asset design.

Q:⁣ How can ⁣someone learn more or‍ get​ started safely?
A: ​start​ by reading the original whitepaper and reputable technical ⁤overviews; run or join a full node⁣ to learn how ⁤the protocol‍ works in practice; use official, vetted software from trusted project‌ sources; ⁢and practice strong security hygiene (secure⁤ key‍ management, verified downloads, ‌and​ cautious‍ custody choices). official project resources and download pages ‍are ‌useful starting points.[[2]]

The Conclusion

Satoshi Nakamoto’s ⁤2008 proposal for bitcoin established⁤ the‌ core principles of a decentralized,peer-to-peer electronic cash ‌system whose design⁢ is public and implemented‌ by a distributed community of developers and users [[2]]. what began as a white ‍paper and reference ⁣implementation has become an open‑source ecosystem-maintained through projects⁤ such​ as bitcoin Core-and distributed⁣ without reliance on a central authority [[3]]. The ⁤2008 ‍creation remains the essential starting point for‌ understanding bitcoin’s technical architecture, its evolving governance, ‍and⁣ its⁢ broader implications ⁣for money and digital trust; its ⁤continued development and‍ worldwide adoption underscore‌ both ⁣its resilience‌ and the ongoing debates ⁢it⁢ inspires ⁣ [[1]].

Previous Article

How to Sell Bitcoin: Exchanges, P2P Platforms, and ATMs

Next Article

Losing Your Seed Phrase: Permanent Loss of Bitcoin

You might be interested in …

Blockchain AI Underdog Autonio Yields Over 40X Returns for ICO Investors

As we know, the crypto industry is being increasingly seen as a viable and profitable investment avenue. However, crypto trading, because of its new market, is highly unpredictable and volatile.

Autonio entered the market with an aim to offer every level of investor an opportunity to reap the rewards of crypto trading. Essentially, the platform is a decentralized trading bot, merging blockchain and AI technology. The peer-to-peer network is used to determine any code upgrades, which local clients then implement. This results in a gradual and ongoing improvement of the platform.

Members on the platform can buy or sell their trading strategies, as well as their consultation time. In addition, the platform has built-in and extremely-advanced trading indicators; the full spectrum of them can be found on their website: https://auton.io/

The platform’s medium of exchange is the NIO token, which is ERC20 compliant. NIO’s value increased by over 2,000% in its first week alone, with daily trading volume exceeding $430,000 during a spike between the 8th and the 10th of November, followed by another spike between the 12th and the 16th. At one point, NIO pushed the market cap to over $9 million, and it is now sitting at $3.7 million. NIO currently has a circulating supply of 65,828,135, and a total supply of 220,466,789.

Investors in Autonio’s ICO actually received extra returns: Autonio only raised $54,000—mainly because they did not try to oversell themselves—and all remaining tokens that weren’t burned were equally distributed to investors. In actual fact, they received 24.1646 times more tokens because of this. In addition, most investors also received a 70% discount as they contributed in the first round.

That means although the official ICO price was set at $0.05585 per token, the actual price paid by most investors was $0.0014059. Based on the actual price, Autonio made over 40 times as much on their returns, and if they sold at the peak, they would have made returns of more than 95 times as much.

“I have confidence in my vision and in what I’m trying to build,” said Ali Raheman, the Project Manager of Autonio.

“Because of the experience of my mentors, the feasibility of what we’re building was in constant check, and fortunately for us, the community saw that and wholeheartedly supported us. This is a very humble beginning for a platform that has been made purely for the community, and with the interest of users and investors in mind.”

The owner of NewsBTC, Jonathan Millet, as well as Andrew Wagner, who is the Community Manager for the news portal, are both advisors on the project. They have stated that are proud to work with successful clients who don’t disappoint investors, and that’s exactly what Autonio is.

The platform also has a very active online community on Telegram (t.me/Autonio), thanks in part to the many activities that they’re involved in. This includes airdrops like the one held for MBRS holders, and there will also be one for all ETH holders in the future.

In addition, the platform also holds trading competitions (more on http://nioking.algoshare.net/) in order to which attract high-quality traders. These competitions not only act as a great way for crypto investors to experience the benefits of Autonio, but they also allow the platform’s AI technology to learn from the strategies of the winning competitors. The platform has already had profits ranging from 1,062% to 4,235% APR.

Based on the excellent response to Autonio, it seems as if both their popularity and adoption will continue to grow. By combining the increasingly popular AI industry with the continuously growing blockchain industry, the sky is the limit as to what further advancements can be made, and what more Autonio can offer.

The post Blockchain AI Underdog Autonio Yields Over 40X Returns for ICO Investors appeared first on NEWSBTC.

Mordversuch an Alexander Vinnik verhindert

BTC-ECHO Mordversuch an Alexander Vinnik verhindert Griechische Behörden haben einen Plan aufgedeckt, den ehemaligen BTC-e-Börsenbetreiber Alexander Vinnik umzubringen. Vinnik ist seit fast einem Jahr in Griechenland inhaftiert. US-Strafverfolger werfen ihm Geldwäsche in Milliardenhöhe vor. Im […]