Day: August 10, 2017

The Russian Ministry of Health is working with one of the country’s state-owned banks to explore possible uses of blockchain.

Most of us wonder what would happen if we pitted different artificial intelligence projects against one another. Competition often leads to more innovation, and thus the result should be good no matter who wins. Dueling AIs are now competing at the Conference and Workshop on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) by learning to walk, manipulate images, and so on. Competition can bring out the best and worst in humans, yet it remains to be seen how AIs will respond to the challenge.

Competing AIs Can Be Rather Beneficial

NIPS pits different AI solutions against one another to see which one comes up with the better solution to a problem. Considering how the focus is on learning to walk and manipulate images, among other things, this is incredibly interesting. Competition always brings out the best in smart people, thus it only makes sense that it would do exactly the same with capable artificial intelligence.

We have already seen competing AIs resorting to dirty tactics when pitted against one another. When two AIs battle one another in a video game, for example, each will quickly resort to one-upping the competition and attempt to eliminate its opponent in order to gain an advantage. Whether having competing AIs focus on scientific research will yield similar results remains to be seen.

NIPS lets different AIs focus on similar tasks to come up with new and creative solutions to various problems. It is an interesting concept that could yield some very surprising results. It will be interesting to see how different AI solutions are built and how they will tackle the challenges placed in front of them. The focus of this conference is on intriguing problems such as imitating human muscles, manipulating images, and answering pub quiz questions (yes, really).

Many teams sought to compete at this conference. Of the 23 applicants, five were selected to partake in the event come December 2017. However, the contest is ongoing, as it would be quite difficult to build an AI system from scratch in 24 to 36 hours. There are cash prizes for the winners, and several companies are sponsoring these events. It is good to see such a strong focus on projects like these, as having AIs compete seems to be the best way forward.

Focusing on learning to run is by far the most intriguing project. The competing AI solutions will need to come up with ways to simulate how the human brain controls the muscles and bones used for locomotion. The AIs must anticipate a changing sequence of events, such as slippery floors, obstacles, weak muscles, and other factors. The goal is not to build an AI that can walk, but to learn how brain surgeries could affect gait in people dealing with afflictions.

Classifying clinically actionable genetic mutations is another fascinating area in which teams have focused. Conversational intelligence is another. The outcomes of all ongoing contests will not be revealed before December of this year. However, the teams have already focused their attention on these problems and on coming up with creative and workable solutions. NIPS made the right decision in pitting AI against each other, and we cannot wait to see the results.

The SEC has disapproved two proposed Bitcoin ETFs, but the CFTC recently approved the creation of a regulated Bitcoin futures market. Ironically, the CFTC’s approval may eventually force the SEC’s hand.

A UK startup is attempting to move gold to the consumer spending heights Bitcoin has already achieved.

Yet another popular cryptocurrency service provider has been hacked. LiteBit.eu is a European cryptocurrency broker which recently warned its users about suspicious activities on its servers. Someone successfully accessed company data, but it appears that all wallet balances are accounted for at the time of writing. None of the ID verification documents have been leaked either.

LiteBit Hack is Pretty Worrisome

It is good to know cryptocurrency service providers can suffer hacks without losing millions of dollars in customer funds. Usually, these sorts of hacks end with people losing money and companies closing their doors. LiteBit.eu is the latest company to suffer a hack, although the recent incident appears to be more of a data breach than anything else. In fact, no customer funds were stolen in the breach, which took place on August 5, 2017.

In an email to all customers, the company explained that their funds were safe and that ID verification documents were inaccessible to the hacker. However, the message noted that the hacker(s) had successfully obtained some server data. This was a pretty vague statement, but it seemed to confirm that no financial details had been leaked during the incident. That still could mean that the hacker might have obtained customer records including names and addresses, among other things. Hashed passwords may also have been stolen in the process, although this has not been officially confirmed.

Luckily, it appears the LiteBit team was able to identify the source of the data breach. The company has confirmed that the leak has been plugged, although they have not gone into specific details for the time being. A lot of cryptocurrency service providers suffer from issues which give hackers unauthorized access now and then. Indeed, that is how most exchange hacks have occurred in recent years. Something needs to be done to beef up platform security, lest more people end up losing valuable funds.

Any LiteBit user who has enabled two-factor authentication on his or her account will be required to re-enable it and change their password. Users who do not have this feature should certainly update their account passwords. Now would be a great time to start using password generators to avoid reusing the same passphrases on multiple sites. Any other platform where people use the same login or password will need to get updated as well. It is unclear whether the hackers obtained any data, but it is always better to err on the side of caution with this sort of thing.

Many LiteBit users are not too happy with this news. Some people had been growing annoyed with the platform prior to this hack. LiteBit allows users to quickly buy cryptocurrencies using traditional payment methods, but recently it has seemed to go into maintenance mode quite often. We can only hope the company makes some improvements in both this as well as the security department.

Services such as LiteBit will grow more popular over time. Consumers are looking for more ways to purchase cryptocurrency over the counter. Brokers like LiteBit will play an integral role in this regard. However, LiteBit will need to avoid service outages and data breaches moving forward. That is a lot easier said than done, of course. It will be interesting to note whether another update regarding this platform is posted in the near future.

Coinbase has closed what is likely the largest-ever funding round by a startup building on a public blockchain and providing cryptocurrency services.

The recent massive run up in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency prices has led to a bit of a debate regarding the very nature of Bitcoin, and the question of whether it has the potential to replace other fiat currencies.

There are many different opinions about the activation of SegWit2x. As most people are well aware by now, on August 8 the Bitcoin network successfully locked in the activation of Segregated Witness. SegWit will be going live in two weeks, but come November there was supposed to be a hard fork to increase the block size to 2MB. According to Samson Maw, that hard fork has been canceled.

What is the Deal With the SegWit2x Hard Fork?

There is a lot of conflicting information regarding the future activation of SegWit2x. Most Bitcoin users will recall this scaling solution agreed upon through the New York Agreement. It is also one of the main reasons why the Bitcoin network finally locked in the activation of Segregated Witness after nearly a full year of stalling, political discussion, and the Bitcoin Cash hard fork. That does not mean SegWit2x will activate without a hitch, though.

Originally, SegWit2x was to be introduced as a hard fork. Just because its supporters wished to activate Segregated Witness did not mean they would follow the plan of Bitcoin Core. In particular, the part about forcefully upgrading the Bitcoin block size to 2MB has kept the community divided. If SegWit2x were to hard fork and attain enough traction to keep the chain alive, we would effectively be dealing with three different instances of Bitcoin come November 2017. (This would not include fake Bitcoin clones like BitcoinPlus and BitcoinDark.)

PSA: NYA November #SegWit2x hard-fork has been cancelled. https://t.co/odqyVgyyRf

— Samson Mow (@Excellion) August 9, 2017

However, the above tweet from Samson Mow suggests there will be no hard fork for SegWit2x. It is unclear whether this is an official statement that holds any merit, but it would make a lot more sense not to have another blockchain fork unless it were absolutely necessary. After all, the people who want larger blocks can easily support Bitcoin Cash, even though that network does not have Segregated Witness in place. In theory, that is not necessarily needed to solve the transaction throughput issue, but SegWit is about so much more than just that.

3/ The 2X hard fork is unnecessary now that we have Segwit and the lightning network to provide short to medium term scaling.

— Hubert (@sovereign_ind) August 8, 2017

According to Hubert on Twitter, a 2x hard fork is “unnecessary” as there will be no need for a 2MB block size increase once SegWit successfully activates. Not only will Segregated Witness increase the Bitcoin transaction throughput, but it also paves the way for solutions such as Lightning Network, Rootstock, drivechains, and even sidechains if need be. A lot of information can be moved off the main Bitcoin blockchain which would only keep the bare essentials of transactions. A 2MB block size increase would do the same as well, but pushing for Lightning Network is perhaps a better solution.

That is much easier said than done. Despite phenomenal progress being made on Lightning Network, implementing it for Bitcoin may take another three to twelve months. This is not a short-term scaling solution, even though it has much more long-term potential than a flat-out block size increase would. There will always be a certain trade-off regardless of which solution receives the majority of support in the long run.

There is still a lot of signaling support by mining pools for SegWit2x. Do keep in mind that this only reflects the intention to support it when the time arrives and is not a full commitment. Now that BIP141 has been properly locked in, it will be interesting to see how many entities back out of the New York Agreement in the coming weeks and months. It is possible everyone supporting SegWit2x may find themselves on the losing side of this scaling war.

Singapore’s financial regulator has expanded on its opinion of ICO tokens issuing a six-point list of “risks.”

Despite Bitcoin’s daily increases, a correction down to $3,000 is “likely” unless markets close above $3,500, a report says.

Self-driving cars are the future of automotive technology. Although these vehicles are well programmed, they are still prone to issues and trickery. A team of eight researchers successfully altered street signs to confuse self-driving cars. The cars’ internal software wrongfully classified the signs and consequently made bad decisions.

Self-Driving Cars Are Not Immune to Error

One aspect of self-driving cars that makes them so appealing is how they can analyze the environment to make their own decisions. Most autonomous vehicles are more than capable of collecting sensory information from street signs, for instance. Cars will analyze those signs, alter their behavior accordingly, and ensure that the passenger arrives at the intended location safely. However, trouble arises when street signs are altered.

A team of eight researchers recently conducted an experiment involving altered street signs and autonomous vehicles. It turns out that the machine learning algorithm developed for most of the vehicles will misclassify altered signs and consequently make wrong decisions. In the worst case scenario, these vehicles would risk endangering the lives of passengers.

Conducting experiments like these is an absolute necessity when it comes to driverless cars. This research shows how an assailant could easily print and place posters on top of street signs or attach small stickers to make them look like something else entirely. For example, a sign with an arrow pointing to the right could be overlayed with stickers and be faked to appear as pointing to the left. This may seem harmless at first, but it could have widespread consequences.

Fake street signs also fool human drivers, so the problem is not unique to driverless cars. The latter may be more easily tricked, however. Unfortunately, nearly seven in ten sign defacements successfully fool autonomous cars. That number is absolutely unacceptable, especially considering how these signs could be misinterpreted. For example, a stop sign might be erroneously classified as reading “Speed Limit 45.”

Self-driving car technology will become more widespread and smarter over time. However, keeping street signs clear of vandalism, graffiti, and whatnot will be difficult. Thankfully, it appears that countermeasures exist. Using an anti-stick coating for street signs, for example, would certainly alleviate a lot of concerns.  Car vendors will also need to upgrade their machine learning algorithms to take these potential issues into account first and foremost.

All of this research has been documented in the Robust Physical-World Attack on Machine Learning Models paper. It is not the first time we have seen similar research, and it is obvious self-driving cars can be disrupted easily. Aside from defaced street signs, cars’ own software makes them vulnerable more often than not. There is still a lot of work to be done.