DD
MM
YYYY

CATEGORIES

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

CATEGORIES

PAGES

Home Blog Page 3887

ARK swaps another $15M of BITO as $1.5B flows out of GBTC with more to come- JPMorgan

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

ARK Invest, the investment firm led by Cathie Wood, has swapped another $15 million worth of shares in the ProShares Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITO) for its own ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF (ARKB) on Friday, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

This is the second time that ARK has made such a move, after swapping $20 million of BITO for ARKB on Wednesday. The firm now holds about $35 million of ARKB, which is the first actively managed bitcoin ETF in the US.

ARKB, which launched on January 10, aims to provide exposure to bitcoin by investing in bitcoin futures contracts and other bitcoin-related instruments. The fund charges a 0.95% expense ratio and has an initial target allocation of 60% bitcoin futures and 40% Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC).

BITO, on the other hand, is a passive ETF that tracks the performance of the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate, a benchmark that reflects the price of bitcoin based on spot and futures markets. BITO charges a 0.95% expense ratio and invests solely in bitcoin futures contracts.

By swapping BITO for ARKB, ARK is betting on the superior performance of its own fund, which has more flexibility and diversification than BITO. ARK also believes that ARKB will benefit from the growing adoption and innovation in the bitcoin ecosystem, as well as the potential approval of a spot bitcoin ETF in the future.

ARK is one of the most prominent and influential investors in the crypto space, with over $1 billion worth of GBTC and over $300 million worth of Coinbase (COIN) shares across its various funds. The firm also holds stakes in several crypto-related companies, such as Square (SQ), PayPal (PYPL), Robinhood (HOOD), and Twitter (TWTR).

The Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) is one of the most popular ways for investors to gain exposure to Bitcoin without having to buy and store the cryptocurrency themselves. However, the trust has been underperforming the price of Bitcoin in recent months, leading to a large discount in its shares compared to the underlying asset value. This has prompted some investors to sell their GBTC shares and seek other avenues to invest in Bitcoin, such as exchange-traded funds (ETFs) or spot markets.

According to a report by JPMorgan, the outflows from GBTC have been significant and could continue in the near future. The report estimates that about $1.5 billion worth of GBTC shares have been sold since mid-November 2021, representing about 9% of the total assets under management (AUM) of the trust. The report also suggests that the outflows could accelerate as more GBTC shares become unlocked and eligible for sale in the coming weeks.

The main reason for the GBTC discount is the lack of an arbitrage mechanism that would allow investors to buy GBTC shares at a discount and redeem them for Bitcoin at a premium, thus narrowing the gap between the two prices. However, GBTC does not offer such a redemption option, and instead relies on periodic creations of new shares by accredited investors who depo1sit Bitcoin into the trust. These investors have to wait for six months before they can sell their GBTC shares on the secondary market, creating a supply and demand imbalance that affects the price.

The report argues that the introduction of Bitcoin ETFs in the US could provide a more efficient and liquid alternative for investors who want to access Bitcoin through a regulated vehicle. The report notes that several Bitcoin ETF applications are pending approval by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and that some of them could launch as early as February 2022. The report expects that these ETFs would trade at a much smaller premium or discount than GBTC and would also offer a redemption option that would allow investors to exchange their ETF shares for Bitcoin or cash.

The report concludes that the outlook for GBTC is challenging, and that its AUM could decline further as more investors switch to other Bitcoin products. The report also warns that the GBTC discount could have a negative impact on the price of Bitcoin itself, as it reduces the demand for the cryptocurrency from institutional investors who use GBTC as a proxy.

Mark Zuckerberg’s GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) flex

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

Mark Zuckerberg, the founder and CEO of Facebook, recently posted a photo of his personal computer setup on Instagram. The photo showed a sleek and minimalist desk with a large monitor, a keyboard, a mouse, and a pair of headphones. But what caught the attention of many tech enthusiasts was the massive GPU (graphics processing unit) that was visible behind the monitor.

A GPU is a specialized chip that handles graphics-intensive tasks such as rendering images, videos, and games. GPUs are also used for artificial intelligence and machine learning applications, such as facial recognition and natural language processing. GPUs are usually installed inside the computer case, but Zuckerberg’s GPU was mounted externally on a stand, presumably to showcase its size and power.

Zuckerberg did not reveal the exact model of his GPU, but some speculated that it could be the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090, which is one of the most powerful and expensive GPUs on the market. The RTX 3090 has 24 GB of memory and can deliver up to 36 teraflops of performance, which is equivalent to 36 trillion floating-point operations per second. The RTX 3090 costs around $1,500 and is often sold out due to high demand.

Zuckerberg’s GPU flex was interpreted by some as a sign of his passion for technology and innovation, as well as his involvement in Facebook’s research and development projects. Facebook owns Oculus, a leading virtual reality company, and also invests in artificial intelligence and augmented reality technologies. Zuckerberg has said that he wants to create a “metaverse”, which is a shared virtual environment where people can interact with each other and digital content.

The metaverse is not a new concept. It was first coined by sci-fi author Neal Stephenson in his 1992 novel Snow Crash and has since been explored by various media and entertainment franchises, such as Ready Player One, The Matrix, and Fortnite. However, Zuckerberg believes that the metaverse is more than just a fictional or gaming scenario. He sees it as the next evolution of the internet, where instead of browsing web pages or watching videos, people can immerse themselves in interactive and immersive experiences that span the physical and digital worlds.

According to Zuckerberg, the metaverse will enable new forms of social connection, entertainment, education, work, commerce, and creativity. He envisions a future where people can teleport to different virtual locations, such as a friend’s living room, a concert hall, or a classroom, using VR headsets or AR glasses.

They can also create and customize their own avatars, express themselves with gestures and emotions, and interact with realistic simulations of objects and environments. Moreover, they can access the metaverse from any device, whether it’s a smartphone, a tablet, a PC, or a console, and seamlessly switch between them.

To realize this ambitious vision, Facebook is not only developing its own hardware and software products, such as the Oculus Quest 2 VR headset, the Horizon social VR platform, and the Spark AR Studio for creating AR effects. It is also collaborating with other companies and developers to create an open and interoperable metaverse ecosystem.

For instance, Facebook recently announced a partnership with Ray-Ban to launch smart glasses that can capture photos and videos. It also joined forces with Microsoft to form the XR Association, an industry group that promotes responsible development and adoption of VR and AR technologies.

Facebook’s metaverse initiative is not without challenges and controversies. Some critics have raised concerns about the potential privacy, security, ethical, and social implications of creating a virtual world that is controlled by a single company that has a history of data breaches and antitrust issues.

Others have questioned the feasibility and desirability of the metaverse itself, arguing that it could create more isolation, addiction, and inequality among users. Furthermore, Facebook faces fierce competition from other tech companies that are also pursuing their own versions of the metaverse, such as Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon, and Epic Games.

Despite these hurdles, Facebook is determined to make the metaverse a reality. The company recently announced that it will create a new product team dedicated to building the metaverse platform. It also plans to invest at least $10 billion this year in its VR and AR businesses. Zuckerberg has said that he expects the metaverse to reach a billion users in the next decade. Whether or not Facebook will succeed in creating the ultimate virtual world remains to be seen.

However, Zuckerberg’s GPU flex also drew some criticism from those who questioned his motives and ethics. Some accused him of flaunting his wealth and privilege, especially during a time when many people are struggling financially due to the pandemic.

Others pointed out the environmental impact of using such a powerful GPU, which consumes a lot of electricity and generates a lot of heat. Some also argued that Zuckerberg should focus more on addressing the social and political issues that Facebook has been involved in, such as misinformation, hate speech, privacy breaches, and antitrust lawsuits.

Zuckerberg’s GPU flex was a simple photo that sparked a lot of reactions and discussions online. It showed how much technology has advanced and how much influence Facebook has in the world. It also revealed how people have different opinions and perspectives on Zuckerberg’s personality and leadership.

What is Self-Sovereign Identity?

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

Self-sovereign identity (SSI) is a concept that aims to give individuals full control over their digital identities, without relying on intermediaries or centralized authorities. SSI advocates argue that this approach can enhance privacy, security, and autonomy for users, as well as foster innovation and interoperability in the digital identity ecosystem.

However, SSI is not a silver bullet that can solve all the challenges and risks associated with digital identity. In fact, SSI may introduce new problems or exacerbate existing ones, if not implemented carefully and responsibly. I will discuss some of the limitations and pitfalls of SSI, and why it is not enough to ensure a fair and inclusive digital identity for all.

SSI does not guarantee verifiability or trustworthiness.

One of the main benefits of SSI is that it allows users to create and manage their own identity credentials, without depending on third-party issuers or validators. This can reduce the costs and friction of obtaining and using identity proofs, as well as protect users from identity theft or fraud.

However, this also means that SSI does not guarantee the verifiability or trustworthiness of the credentials. Users may create fake or misleading credentials or use them in inappropriate contexts. For example, a user may create a credential that claims to be a doctor but has no valid certification or license. Or a user may use a credential that proves their age, but not their nationality, to access a service that requires both.

Therefore, SSI requires a mechanism to ensure that the credentials are authentic, accurate, and relevant for the purpose they are used for. This may involve verifying the source and quality of the data, checking the validity and revocation status of the credentials, and establishing the trustworthiness of the issuers and holders. These tasks may require additional infrastructure, standards, and governance models, which may undermine the decentralization and self-sovereignty of SSI.

SSI does not ensure consent or data minimization.

Another benefit of SSI is that it enables users to control what data they share with whom, and for what purpose. SSI advocates claim that this can enhance the consent and data minimization principles of data protection, by allowing users to share only the necessary and relevant data for each transaction.

However, SSI does not ensure that users actually understand and exercise their consent and data minimization rights. Users may face challenges in managing their credentials, such as storing them securely, updating them regularly, and revoking them when needed.

Users may also lack the knowledge or skills to evaluate the risks and benefits of sharing their data, or to negotiate the terms and conditions of data sharing. Moreover, users may face pressure or coercion from service providers or other parties to share more data than necessary, or to accept unfavorable terms of service.

Therefore, SSI requires a mechanism to support users in making informed and autonomous decisions about their data sharing. This may involve providing clear and accessible information about the data requests and the consequences of accepting or rejecting them, offering meaningful choices and alternatives for data sharing, and ensuring accountability and redress for data misuse or abuse. These tasks may require additional education, guidance, and regulation, which may increase the complexity and burden of SSI.

SSI does not address social or ethical implications.

A final benefit of SSI is that it empowers users to express their identity in diverse and flexible ways, without being constrained by predefined categories or labels. SSI advocates suggest that this can promote social inclusion and diversity, by allowing users to self-identify with multiple and dynamic attributes that reflect their personal and contextual identities.

However, SSI does not address the social or ethical implications of self-identifying with certain attributes or groups. Users may face discrimination or exclusion based on their identity claims or be denied access to essential services or rights that depend on certain identity attributes.

For example, a user may self-identify as a refugee, but be rejected by a host country that requires official documentation. Or a user may self-identify as a woman but be excluded from a women-only space that requires biological verification.

Therefore, SSI requires a mechanism to balance the individual’s right to self-identify with the collective’s right to define membership and access criteria. This may involve respecting the diversity and fluidity of identity expressions, while also recognizing the legitimacy and authority of certain identity proofs. These tasks may require additional dialogue, collaboration, and compromise among different stakeholders,
which may challenge the self-sovereignty of SSI.

Kenyan Agtech Shamba Pride Announces $3.7M in Funding Round to Expand Its Merchant Network

By
Ojukwu Emmanuel
-
0

Kenyan agriculture technology startup, Shamba Pride, has announced that it has secured the sum of $3.7 million in a debt-equity pre-series A funding round, to expand its merchant network.

The funding round saw investment from EDFI AgriFI (the EU Agriculture Financing Initiative) and Seedstars Africa Ventures. The investment is broken down to a $2 million long-term loan from EDFI Agrifi and $1.7 million in equity from Seedstars Africa Ventures.

With the recent funding, Shamba Pride plans to use it to further its expansion within Kenya, reaching more retailers and agricultural areas. Also, the startup aims to penetrate markets in Zambia, Tanzania, and Uganda, to address challenges in the agricultural supply chain.

Speaking on the funding round, the general partner at SAV, Maxime Bouan said,

“Shamba Pride’s success is based on innovations that facilitate day-to-day farming activities. We’ve been proud to support a scalable model which creates additional revenues for farmers and agro vets (agro-dealers) and strongly contributes to successful women entrepreneurship”.

Also speaking on the startup mission, Shamba Pride founder and CEO Samuel Munguti said,

“Agriculture distribution in rural communities is heavily controlled by agro-dealers who decide how farmers access inputs, services, and training. We are empowering these agro-dealers by giving them the right tools and technology for visibility of their businesses, for their professional and commercial development, and the right support for farmers around them”.

Founded by Samuel Munguti in 2016, Shamba Pride is a technology-driven company that helps farmers access high-quality farm inputs, financing, insurance, and access through an online-to-offline platform that provides tools and technology to retailers to train them to provide quality agricultural products, finance, and insurance to their farmers.

Through Shamba Pride, last-mile agro-dealers and cooperative entrepreneurs are able to digitize their operations and provide smallholder farmers with the right and affordable technology, quality products, and services, thus creating a community of smart micro-entrepreneurs serving the smallholder farmer community.

Also, the agritech extends market connections, Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) financial services, and training information to farmers via its USSD platform. It focuses majorly on small-scale farmers within Kenya’s agriculture sector.

The startup transforms the most promising stores into DigiShops, with its platform connecting last-mile stores and farmers with manufacturers of quality inputs and services, thereby addressing problems of quality and price exploitation and promoting transparent supply chain systems.

The majority of smallholder farmers depend on informal agro-dealer stores and cooperatives to access inputs and key services, which are beset by poor supply, poor management, and exploitative prices.

Shamba Pride key purpose is to economically and socially empower and elevate farming communities at the grassroots level throughout Africa.

UK’s participation in Yemen Strikes, Iran Strikes and Brewing Regional Conflicts

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

The UK’s involvement in the bombing campaign against Yemen has revealed its weakened military capabilities. I will analyze how the UK’s role in the Yemen war has exposed its lack of strategic vision, operational readiness and diplomatic influence. I will also discuss the implications of this situation for the UK’s security and global standing.

The UK has been supporting the Saudi-led coalition in its intervention in Yemen since 2015, providing weapons, intelligence and logistical support. The coalition aims to restore the internationally recognized government of President Hadi, who was ousted by the Houthi rebels in 2014. However, the war has resulted in a humanitarian catastrophe, with more than 230,000 deaths, millions displaced and facing famine, and widespread violations of human rights and international law.

The UK’s participation in the air strikes on Yemen has been controversial and criticized by many, including some of its own MPs, human rights groups and the UN. The main arguments against the UK’s involvement are that it is fueling the conflict, worsening the humanitarian crisis, undermining its credibility as a champion of human rights and international law, and risking complicity in war crimes.

Moreover, the UK’s participation in the air strikes on Yemen has exposed its diminished military strength. The UK has relied heavily on its alliance with the US and Saudi Arabia, without having a clear strategy or objective of its own. The UK has also faced operational challenges, such as a shortage of pilots, aircraft and munitions, and a lack of oversight and accountability for its actions. The UK has also failed to exert any meaningful diplomatic influence on the parties involved in the conflict, or to promote a peaceful resolution.

The implications of this situation are serious for the UK’s security and global standing. The UK’s involvement in the Yemen war has increased its vulnerability to terrorist attacks, as well as alienated some of its allies and partners in the region and beyond. The UK’s diminished military strength has also eroded its credibility and influence as a global power, especially in light of its withdrawal from Afghanistan and its strained relations with the EU after Brexit.

The UK’s participation in the air strikes on Yemen has revealed its weakened military capabilities. The UK has been supporting a war that is not in its national interest, that is causing immense human suffering, and that is damaging its reputation and role in the world. The UK should reconsider its involvement in the Yemen war, and instead focus on strengthening its military capabilities, pursuing a coherent and ethical foreign policy, and promoting peace and stability in the region.

Iran Strikes Back: A New Escalation in the Regional Conflict

On January 20, 2024, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched a series of missile attacks against targets in Iraq and Syria, as well as a cross-border raid against a Pakistani-based militant group.

These operations were carried out in retaliation for a deadly terror attack in Kerman, Iran, on January 18, which killed 27 people and wounded dozens more. The attack was claimed by the Islamic State (ISIS), which has been trying to reassert its presence in the region after losing most of its territory and leadership.

The IRGC said that its missiles hit “the headquarters and gathering centers of the Takfiri terrorists” in Iraq’s Kurdistan region and Syria’s Deir ez-Zor province, where ISIS remnants have been operating. The IRGC also said that it targeted “the main base of the terrorist group Jaish al-Adl” in Pakistan’s Balochistan province, which has been behind several attacks on Iranian security forces and civilians in recent years.

The Iranian strikes were met with condemnation and warnings from the governments of Iraq, Syria, and Pakistan, as well as the United States and its allies. They accused Iran of violating their sovereignty and territorial integrity, and of escalating the already tense situation in the region. They also expressed concern about the potential for further violence and instability, especially as Iran is preparing for its presidential election in June.

Iran, however, defended its actions as legitimate self-defense and deterrence against the threats posed by ISIS and other terrorist groups. It also blamed the United States and its allies for supporting and enabling these groups, and for failing to prevent their activities. Iran also warned that it would not hesitate to respond to any aggression or provocation from its enemies.

The Iranian strikes mark a new level of escalation in the regional conflict that has been simmering for years. Iran has been engaged in a proxy war with Saudi Arabia and its allies, who accuse Iran of meddling in their internal affairs and supporting various militias and movements across the region. Iran has also been facing increasing pressure from the United States and Israel, who have imposed crippling sanctions on Iran and carried out covert operations and assassinations against Iranian officials and scientists.

The Iranian strikes also raise questions about the future of the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and the world powers, which has been hanging by a thread since the United States withdrew from it in 2018 and reimposed sanctions on Iran.

The remaining parties to the deal have been trying to salvage it and bring the United States back into compliance, but their efforts have been hampered by mutual mistrust and political obstacles. The Iranian strikes could further complicate the diplomatic process and jeopardize the prospects for a peaceful resolution of the nuclear issue.

The Iranian strikes demonstrate that Iran is not willing to back down or compromise on its regional interests and ambitions, despite the economic hardship and international isolation it faces. They also show that Iran is capable of striking back at its enemies with precision and force, despite their superior military and technological advantages.

However, they also carry significant risks and costs for Iran, as they could invite more retaliation and confrontation from its adversaries and alienate potential partners and mediators. The Iranian strikes could thus trigger a spiral of violence and escalation that could engulf the whole region in a wider war.

1...3,8863,8873,888...8,693Page 3,887 of 8,693

© Tekedia. All rights reserved.

Term & Privacy

© Tekedia. All rights reserved.

Term & Privacy