DD
MM
YYYY

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

PAGES

Home Blog Page 3766

Atiku, Obi File Appeals Challenging PEPC Judgment Upholding Tinubu’s Victory

0

The presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Mr. Peter Obi, has submitted a petition with 51 grounds of appeal to the Supreme Court, seeking the annulment of the judgment from the Presidential Election Petition Court, as well as the election victory of President Bola Tinubu.

Former Vice President and the presidential flagbearer of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, also filed an appeal on 35 grounds challenging the ruling of the court.

The appeals are coming nearly two weeks after the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) quashed all the charges filed against Tinubu by Atiku, Obi, and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM).

In his notice of appeal, Mr. Peter Obi argued that the Presidential Election Petitions Court made legal errors and arrived at an incorrect conclusion when it dismissed his petition challenging the outcome of the presidential election.

He contends that the five-member tribunal, led by Justice Haruna Tsammani, committed a miscarriage of justice by asserting that he did not specify the polling units where irregularities occurred during the election.

Furthermore, Mr. Obi criticizes the Presidential Election Petitions Court for dismissing his case based on the premise that he did not provide specific figures for the votes or scores that were allegedly manipulated in favor of President Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Additionally, he accuses the panel of making a legal error by relying on paragraphs 4(1) (d) (2) and 54 of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act 2022 to strike out paragraphs of his petition.

Mr. Peter Obi has accused the lower court of violating his right to a fair hearing. He asserts that the evidence provided by his witnesses was wrongly dismissed as incompetent.

He argues that the panel unjustly rejected his claim that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) uploaded 18,088 blurred results on its IReV portal.

Additionally, Mr. Obi alleges that the tribunal ignored his assertion that the Certified True Copies (CTC) of documents issued by INEC to his legal team contained 8,123 blurred results, which included blank A4 papers, pictures, and images of unknown individuals, falsely presented as the CTC of polling unit results from the presidential election.

Mr. Obi contends that the lower court mishandled his case by dismissing crucial evidence and not addressing his allegations of irregularities related to INEC’s actions and the authenticity of the documents provided.

Atiku’s Appeal

The Notice of Appeal filed by Atiku’s lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche, SAN is praying the apex court to set aside the whole findings and conclusions of the tribunal on the grounds that they did not represent the true picture of the grounds of his petition.

The former Vice President maintained that the tribunal erred in law when it failed to nullify the presidential election held on Feb. 25.

He wants the election nullified on the grounds of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, when by evidence before the tribunal; INEC conducted the election based on grave and gross misrepresentation contrary to the principles of the Electoral Act 2022, based on the “doctrine of legitimate expectation”.

Atiku alleged that the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) erred in law by not taking into cognizance the Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation when the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) failed to conduct the election in accordance with its own guidelines and the Electoral Act 2022.

The doctrine of legitimate expectation, he said, was first developed in English law as a ground of judicial review in administrative law to protect a procedural or substantive interest when a public authority rescinds a representation made to a person.

He said in Nigeria, the doctrine of legitimate expectation demands that a public authority shall respect and apply its stated position or sustained practice in exercising its powers on members of the public.

Abubakar prayed the Supreme Court to declare him the authentic winner of the Feb. 25 presidential election based on lawful votes cast by Nigerians during the poll.

He said that in the alternative, the apex court should order a rerun election to be conducted for him and Tinubu being the 1st and 2nd runners-up in the last presidential election.

While challenging the entire judgment of the tribunal, Atiku claimed that the lower court erred in law when it failed to determine his case with respect to the mandatory verification and confirmation required before the announcement of the results of the presidential election, pursuant to Section 64(4) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

Atiku Abubakar’s Notice of Appeal, represented by Chief Chris Uche, SAN, seeks to challenge the findings and conclusions of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC). He asserts that these findings did not accurately represent the grounds of his petition.

Atiku contends that the PEPC made a legal error by failing to annul the February 25 presidential election. He argues that the election should be nullified due to non-compliance with the Electoral Act 2022 and grave misrepresentation by INEC, based on the doctrine of legitimate expectation.

He asserts that the PEPC overlooked the Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation, which requires public authorities to honor their stated positions or sustained practices in exercising their powers.

Atiku calls upon the Supreme Court to declare him the rightful winner of the presidential election based on lawful votes or, alternatively, to order a rerun election for him and Bola Tinubu as the 1st and 2nd runners-up.

He challenges the entire judgment of the PEPC and argues that the lower court erred in failing to address the mandatory verification and confirmation required before announcing election results, as mandated by Section 64(4) of the Electoral Act 2022.

Furthermore, Atiku questions the PEPC’s interpretation of Section 134(2) of the 1999 Constitution, specifically concerning the requirement for Tinubu to secure 25% of lawful votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

Ethereum Co-founder backs Ethereum scaling network Layer N

0

Layer N, a decentralized network that aims to improve the scalability and performance of Ethereum, has raised $20 million in a Series A funding round led by Founders Fund, the venture capital firm founded by Peter Thiel. The funding round also saw participation from other prominent investors, such as Polychain Capital, Coinbase Ventures, Pantera Capital, and Framework Ventures.

Layer N is based on the concept of sharding, which divides the network into smaller and parallel shards that can process transactions faster and cheaper than the main chain. Layer N also supports cross-shard communication and cross-chain bridges, enabling seamless interaction between different shards and other blockchains.

Ethereum 2.0 is the upcoming upgrade of the Ethereum network, which also adopts sharding as a scalability solution. Ethereum 2.0 will consist of a main chain called the Beacon Chain, which coordinates the activity of 64 shards, and a set of execution layers, which run the smart contracts and state transitions. Ethereum 2.0 will also introduce proof-of-stake as a consensus mechanism, replacing the current proof-of-work system.

How does Layer N compare to Ethereum 2.0? we will explore some of the similarities and differences between the two platforms and discuss their advantages and disadvantages for developers and users.

Similarities:

Both Layer N and Ethereum 2.0 use sharding as a way to increase the throughput and scalability of the network. Sharding allows parallel processing of transactions, reducing congestion and fees on the main chain.

Both Layer N and Ethereum 2.0 support cross-shard and cross-chain communication, enabling interoperability between different shards and other blockchains. This allows for more complex and diverse applications that can leverage the strengths of different platforms.

Both Layer N and Ethereum 2.0 are compatible with the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM), which means that existing smart contracts and tools can be easily ported to either platform. This lowers the entry barrier for developers and users who want to migrate or experiment with new platforms.

Differences:

Layer N uses a hybrid consensus model that combines proof-of-work and proof-of-stake, while Ethereum 2.0 uses pure proof-of-stake. Proof-of-work is a more secure but more energy-intensive way of validating transactions, while proof-of-stake is a more efficient but less decentralized way of reaching consensus. Layer N claims that its hybrid model offers the best of both worlds, balancing security and efficiency, while Ethereum 2.0 argues that proof-of-stake is sufficient for ensuring security and decentralization.

Layer N has a fixed number of shards (128), while Ethereum 2.0 has a variable number of shards (64 initially but can change dynamically). Layer N claims that its fixed sharding scheme simplifies the design and implementation of the platform, while Ethereum 2.0 claims that its variable sharding scheme allows for more flexibility and adaptability to changing network conditions.

Layer N has a native token called LYN, which is used for paying fees, staking and governance, while Ethereum 2.0 uses ETH as its native token for the same purposes. LYN is a new token that has to establish its value and utility in the market, while ETH is an established token that has a large and loyal user base.

Layer N is one of the projects that leverages the concept of rollups, a layer 2 solution that bundles multiple transactions into a single one and executes them on a sidechain, before settling them on the main Ethereum chain. This reduces the congestion and fees on the Ethereum network, which has been struggling to cope with the high demand from various applications, especially decentralized finance (DeFi) and non-fungible tokens (NFTs).

Layer N claims to offer a unique approach to rollups, by combining zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) and optimistic rollups. ZKPs are cryptographic techniques that allow users to prove the validity of their transactions without revealing any details, while optimistic rollups assume that transactions are valid unless someone challenges them. Layer N says that its hybrid solution can achieve higher throughput, lower latency, and better security than other rollup implementations.

Layer N also boasts a strong team of developers and researchers, who have contributed to various projects in the Ethereum ecosystem, such as Optimism, StarkWare, and zkSync. The team says that it plans to use the new funding to expand its team, launch its mainnet, and onboard more partners and users.

Founders Fund partner Brian Singerman said that he was impressed by Layer N’s vision and technology, and that he believes that layer 2 solutions are essential for the future of Ethereum.

“We are excited to back Layer N as they build a scalable and secure layer 2 network for Ethereum. Layer N’s hybrid approach to rollups is innovative and promising, and we think it will enable more developers and users to benefit from the power of Ethereum,” Singerman said.

Layer N co-founder and CEO Daniel Wang said that he was grateful for the support from Founders Fund and other investors, and that he hopes to make Ethereum more accessible and affordable for everyone.

“We are thrilled to have Founders Fund as our lead investor, as they share our vision of creating a more open and decentralized web. Layer N is committed to solving the scalability and usability challenges of Ethereum, and to bring the benefits of blockchain technology to the masses,” Wang said.

Layer N and Ethereum 2.0 are both ambitious projects that aim to bring blockchain technology to the next level. They share some common features, such as sharding and interoperability, but also have some distinct differences, such as consensus mechanism and sharding scheme. Depending on their preferences and needs, developers and users may choose one platform over the other, or use both platforms in conjunction. Ultimately, both platforms will contribute to the innovation and diversity of the blockchain ecosystem.

Optimism to distribute unclaimed funds from first airdrop

0

Optimism, the layer 2 scaling solution for Ethereum, has announced that it will distribute the unclaimed funds from its first airdrop to the community. The airdrop, which took place in July 2022, was meant to reward early adopters of the Optimism network with its native token, OPT. However, due to technical issues and low awareness, only about 40% of the eligible wallets claimed their tokens within the deadline.

The Optimism token is used to pay for transaction fees on the Optimism network, as well as to participate in governance and staking. The project decided to distribute 1% of its total supply of 10 billion OPT to users who interacted with Optimism-compatible applications before July 1, 2021. The airdrop was based on a snapshot taken on June 25, 2021, and each eligible user received 0.25 OPT per transaction.

The Optimism team decided that instead of burning or keeping the remaining 60% of the tokens, they would redistribute them to the users who participated in the network’s activity since the launch. This includes users who deposited, withdrew, or interacted with any smart contracts on Optimism. The team believes that this is a fair and transparent way to reward the loyal and engaged community members who have supported the network’s growth and development.

The distribution will take place in two phases. The first phase will start on September 20, 2023, and will last for one month. During this phase, users can claim their tokens by connecting their wallets to the Optimism dashboard and following the instructions. The amount of tokens each user will receive will depend on their proportional share of the network’s activity.

The second phase will start on October 20, 2023, and will last for six months. During this phase, users who did not claim their tokens in the first phase will have a second chance to do so, but with a 10% penalty. The penalty will be used to fund future airdrops and community initiatives.

According to CoinGecko, OPT rose from $0.18 on September 15 to $0.42 on September 18, a 133% increase in three days and currently trading at $1.35 per token. The token also reached a new high on September 17, shortly after the airdrop announcement. The trading volume of OPT also surged from $1.2 million to $8.9 million in the same period, indicating a high demand and interest in the token.

The Optimism token surge is a sign of the growing popularity and adoption of layer-2 solutions for Ethereum, as the network faces high congestion and fees due to its limited scalability. Optimism is one of the most anticipated and promising projects in this space and has attracted support from major players such as Uniswap, Synthetix, Chainlink, and Coinbase. With the launch of its token and the expansion of its ecosystem, Optimism is poised to become a key player in the future of Ethereum scaling.

The Optimism team hopes that this distribution will increase the adoption and usage of the network, as well as foster a strong and vibrant community around it. They also encourage users to stake their OPT tokens in the Optimism DAO, which will allow them to participate in the governance and decision-making of the network. The team believes that by giving more power and voice to the users, they can create a more decentralized and secure layer 2 solution for Ethereum.

The airdrop distribution is expected to last for several weeks, as the project is sending out batches of tokens every day. Users can claim their tokens by connecting their wallets to the Optimism gateway and following the instructions on the website. The project also warned users to beware of scams and phishing attempts and advised them to verify the official sources before claiming their tokens.

Japan’s JPEX suspends some operations amid Liquidity Crisis

0

In a shocking announcement, JPEX, one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges in Japan, has decided to suspend some of its trading services and increase its transaction fees due to a severe liquidity shortage. The exchange cited “unprecedented market volatility” and “regulatory uncertainty” as the main reasons for its drastic measures.

According to a press release issued by JPEX on Monday, the exchange will temporarily halt the deposits and withdrawals of several cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, and Ripple, starting from October 1st. The exchange will also increase its trading fees by 50% for all pairs, effective immediately. The exchange did not specify when these measures will be lifted but said it will “monitor the situation closely and resume normal operations as soon as possible”.

The announcement came as a shock to many JPEX users, who expressed their frustration and anger on social media platforms. Some users accused the exchange of mismanagement and fraud, while others demanded compensation and refunds. Some users also speculated that the exchange might be facing insolvency or legal troubles, as it has been under investigation by the Financial Services Agency (FSA) since last year for alleged violations of anti-money laundering regulations.

JPEX is not the only exchange that has been struggling with liquidity issues in recent months. Several other exchanges in Japan and around the world have also reported difficulties in meeting the surging demand for cryptocurrencies, especially after the massive rally in August and September. The volatility and uncertainty in the crypto market have also been exacerbated by the regulatory crackdowns in China, South Korea, and other countries.

Addressing the liquidity crisis is a critical challenge for the crypto industry, as it affects not only the profitability and stability of the market, but also the innovation and adoption of the technology. There are several possible solutions to improve liquidity in the crypto space, such as:

Liquidity pools: Liquidity pools are smart contracts that hold a reserve of two or more tokens and allow users to exchange them at a fixed rate based on their relative supply and demand. Liquidity pools provide a decentralized and automated way of providing liquidity to the market, as anyone can contribute to the pool and earn fees from the trades. Examples of platforms that use liquidity pools are Uniswap, Balancer, and Curve.

Liquidity aggregators: Liquidity aggregators are platforms that connect multiple sources of liquidity, such as exchanges, brokers, OTC desks, and liquidity pools, and offer users the best available price and execution for their trades. Liquidity aggregators reduce the friction and cost of trading across different venues and increase the efficiency and transparency of the market. Examples of platforms that use liquidity aggregators are 1inch, Paraswap, and Matcha.

Liquidity mining: Liquidity mining is a process that rewards users for providing liquidity to a platform or protocol, usually in the form of governance tokens or fees. Liquidity mining incentivizes users to participate in the market and increase its depth and activity. Examples of platforms that use liquidity mining are Compound, Aave, and SushiSwap.

These solutions are not mutually exclusive and can complement each other to create a more liquid and robust crypto market. However, they also come with their own challenges and trade-offs, such as security risks, governance issues, regulatory uncertainty, and scalability limitations. Therefore, it is important for the crypto industry to continue to explore new ways of enhancing liquidity, while also addressing the existing problems and risks.

Liquidity is not only a technical or financial issue, but also a social and cultural one. Liquidity reflects the level of trust, participation, and collaboration among the crypto community. By improving liquidity, we can not only improve the performance and resilience of the market, but also foster a more inclusive and diverse crypto ecosystem that can unleash the full potential of blockchain technology.

The liquidity crisis poses a serious challenge to the growth and stability of the crypto industry, as it undermines the trust and confidence of investors and users. It also highlights the need for more robust and transparent regulation and oversight of crypto exchanges, as well as better risk management and customer protection practices. As the crypto market matures and evolves, it is imperative that exchanges adapt and innovate to meet the changing needs and expectations of their customers.

The Big X (Twitter) Mistake with Monetization, and The Problem of Rigged X Engine Optimization

1

X (yes, Twitter) is broken. It is broken because people have rigged the monetization system. In the past, I used to get value for my business research on Twitter where I could type something, and get some views about that topic.

But today, the results I get are totally uncorrelated with my search. Why? They have taken XEO (X Engine Optimization) to a new level. Simply, you can write any nonsense and hashtag trends so that when people search those trends, you show on the search, and by showing on the search, if you are a monetized account, you make money when those visitors see ads!

So, consider this tweet or whatever it is called now: “We are traveling to Umuahia tomorrow for the group meeting #Obama Biden Ukraine INEC  …”. You can list and tag unrelated things, which are trending at that time. Now, when people search for “INEC”, this post shows up. Notice that this post has nothing to do with INEC.

Why is this happening? Incentives. People want more visitors for those monetizing their accounts, and they’re pushing noise into the platform to bring traffic. Without the money, this would not have happened. They would have focused on hashtagging Umuahia alone! Elon Musk and team must fix this, because its search is broken.

Comment on Feed 

Comment 1: This is not completely the case.

The issue with deliberately misplaced hashtags has been a thing before Musk took over and long before monetization was activated.

The Twitter Trend Table has always been a powerful section of the app, and long before Musk came in, users will do anything to appear on the trend table, and in many cases where they could not, they just simply place the trending tags for the day in their tweets to drive more traffic and visibility to their post.

(The trend table gives informal communities with similar interest, geography, and activity pattern a sense of what the top conversation for the day is. And it drives tons of traffic to the top 10 tags on it daily.)

It’s something that has been prominent and I have personally been irritated by before Musk took over.

If anything, maybe the behaviour just got worse since you can now earn from those views.

Comment 1R: This is correct. However, like Ndubuisi Ekekwe opined, X or Twitter is completely broken. I had mentioned this earlier on that oftentimes trends lead you to totally unrelated posts. It used to be there in the pre-Musk era but it is now completely a metastasized cancer.

Comment 1R: Your last paragraph is what’s happening actually. The behavior has changed because of monetization. People will do anything now to get that.

My Response: Great point there. I think it is the scale that is the issue now as there is a clear monetary incentive to do it