If the food industry is not in crisis, it certainly contains an increasing level of complexity and associated risks. A recent analysis suggested 50% of US food production is wasted, with global estimates above 30%.
Retailers want perfect produce, leading to wastage occurring throughout the food supply chain. They also seek low prices, leading to industrialisation of processes.
Food scares such as mad cow disease (BSE) and cross contamination mean many consumers have less trust in their food, increasingly seeking information on authenticity and production practices.
Over 80% of antibiotics used in the US are used in food production. Farming practices lead to environmental issues and may exacerbate to climate change. Alternate “real world” models are being developed to address some of these issues. For instance, farmers’ markets can reduce food miles, and demonstrate localism. Gleaning, where people collect leftover crops from farmers’ fields after they have been commercially harvested, is becoming popular. There is ever increasing legislation and standards, though these tend to be national or regional, and often onerous to implement.
Recent developments in the digital economy could help. Among these are a growing use of sensors providing information to allow more intelligent practices to reduce costs and improve flexibility. Real time temperature monitoring and smart fridges in homes can help reduce waste. But a relatively new innovation, the blockchain, is seen by many as offering significant opportunities within agricultural supply chains.
Blockchains are the technology that underpin cryptocurrencies like bitcoin, but they have uses other than currencies. They record information in a distributed ledger in a way that is both secure and immutable; by being distributed among many users these ledgers are resilient with no single point of failure, and they can be (depending on design), transparent to all users.
Blockchains and trust
Described by the Economist as “the trust machine”, blockchains provide supply chain transparency and data integrity, allowing a visible assurance of authenticity.
A number of startups are exploring the potential for blockchains in agriculture. Most notable is Provenance.org, a small UK B2B software startup using the blockchain to establish the authenticity of high value goods, including food. They are experimenting with proving the supply chain of tuna caught in Indonesia being delivered to Japanese restaurants. They will use information on sensors or RFID tags and local certification, recorded in the blockchain, to track the fish along its journey from “hook to fork”; creating in the words of one of their founders, a “reputation system”.
Other software firms are developing similar off the shelf solutions for global tracking. Innovators are researching ways in which DNA can be recorded and tagged to an animal, and recorded in the blockchain. This information can easily be made available to end users and customers using mobile phones and apps.
BlockCrushr Labs is a Canadian startup addressing issues of local food poverty and is using the currency and transparency aspects of blockchain technology to increase donations to homeless people, and also to ensure these donations are responsibly spent.
Farmshare is using blockchain to evolve community-supported agriculture, where a local “currency” can be used to purchase locally produced food within a natural community.
Farmers continue to look for ways to certify their crops.U.S. Department of Agriculture/Flickr, CC BY
A wireless sensor firm, Filament, is developing sensors to monitor crop health and recording results in a blockchain. Others are embedding sensors in the harvested crop to record temperature and humidity. These make it easier to trace damaged crops. Linking these sensor records to other connected equipment in the internet of things, such as transport and storage coolers ensures end to end monitoring and safe handling.
Skuchain is developing improved barcodes and RFID tags, and blockchain technology with the aim of protecting end to end global supply chains against counterfeiting.
Firms such as sandwich chain Subway have pledged to remove antibiotics and preservatives from their ingredients. If the wish to deliver these promises, a transparent blockchain where product origin and contents are visible to all would seem to be a suitable approach.
We may typify these proofs of concept and ideas as using the blockchain to provide a permanent audit trail, where visibility leads to accountability and trust, without the need to establish local reputation. This philosophy is obviously not restricted to agriculture.
However blockchain solutions have their own limitations. Principal among these are the need to ensure a tight coupling between the product and its digital representation, and the ongoing need for some form of reputable local certification system in the first mile to, for example, establish the fact of ethical practices.
The inevitable mixing of products and supply chains is another factor complicating easy adoption and implementation. For these reasons current proofs of concept tend to be high value and low volume, and often stimulated by strong social motivations of their founders. Blockchains can only be part of a wider solution, and may remain limited to niche markets where establishing provenance can command higher returns.
Author: Phil Godsiff, Senior Research Fellow, University of Surrey
In 2008, short of sending a suitcase full of cash, there was essentially just one way for an individual to send money between, say, the United States and Europe. You had to wire the money through a mainstream financial service, like Western Union or a bank. That meant paying high fees and waiting up to several days for the money to arrive.
A radically new option arose in 2009 with the introduction of bitcoin. Bitcoin makes it possible to transfer value between two individuals anywhere in the world quickly and at minimal cost. It is often called a “cryptocurrency,” as it is purely digital and uses cryptography to protect against counterfeiting. The software that executes this cryptography runs simultaneously on computers around the world. Even if one or more of these computers is misused in an attempt to corrupt the bitcoin network (such as to steal money), the collective action of the others ensures the integrity of the system as a whole. Its distributed nature also enables bitcoin to process transactions without the fees, antiquated networks and (for better or worse) the rules governing intermediaries like banks and wire services.
Bitcoin’s exciting history and social impact have fired imaginations. The aggregate market value of all issued bitcoins today is roughly US$10 billion. The computing devices that maintain its blockchain are geographically dispersed and owned by thousands of different individuals, so the bitcoin network has no single owner or point of control. Even its creator remains a mystery (despite manyefforts tounmask her, him or them). Bitcoin’s lack of government regulation made it attractive to black markets and malware writers. Although the core system is well-secured, people who own bitcoins have experienced a litany of heists and fraud.
Even more than the currency itself, though, what has drawn the world’s attention are the unprecedented reliability and security of bitcoin’s underlying transaction system, called a blockchain. Researchers, entrepreneurs, and developers believe that blockchains will solve a stunning array of problems, such as stabilization of financial systems, identification of stateless persons, establishing title to real estate and media, and efficiently managing supply chains.
Understanding the blockchain
Despite its richly varied applications, a blockchain such as bitcoin’s aims to realize a simple goal. Abstractly, it can be viewed as creating a kind of public bulletin board, often called a “distributed ledger.” This ledger is public. Anyone – plebeian or plutocrat, baker or banker – can read it. And anyone can write valid data to it. Specifically, in bitcoin, any owner of money can add a transaction to the ledger that transfers some of her money to someone else. The bitcoin network makes sure that the ledger includes only authorized transactions, meaning those digitally signed by the owners of the money being transferred.
The key feature of blockchains is that new data may be written at any time, but can never be changed or erased. At first glance, this etched-in-stone rule seems a needless design restriction. But it gives rise to a permanent, ever-growing transactional history that creates strong transparency and accountability. For example, the bitcoin blockchain contains a record of every transaction in the system since its birth. This feature makes it possible to prevent account holders from reneging on transactions, even if their identities remain anonymous. Once in the ledger, a transaction is undeniable. The indelible nature of the ledger is much more powerful and general, though, allowing blockchains to support applications well beyond bitcoin.
Consider, for example, the management of title to a piece of land or property. Property registries in many parts of the world today are fragmented, incomplete, poorly maintained, and difficult to access. The legal uncertainty surrounding ownership of property is a major impediment to growth in developing economies. Were property titles authoritatively and publicly recorded on a blockchain, anyone could learn instantly who has title to a piece of property. Even legitimate anonymous ownership – as through a private trust – could be recorded on a blockchain.
Such transparency would help resolve legal ambiguity and shed light on malfeasance. Advocates envision similar benefits in blockchain recording of media rights – such as rights to use images or music – identity documents and shipping manifests. In addition, the decentralized nature of the database provides resilience not just to technical failures, but also to political ones – failed states, corruption and graft.
Smart contracts
Blockchains can be enhanced to support not just transactions, but also pieces of code known as smart contracts. A smart contract is a program that controls assets on the blockchain – anything from cryptocurrency to media rights – in ways that guarantee predictable behavior. A smart contract may be viewed as playing the role of a trusted third party: Whatever task it is programmed to do, it will carry out faithfully.
Suppose for example that a user wishes to auction off a piece of land for which her rights are represented on a blockchain. She could hire an auctioneer, or use an online auction site. But that would require her and her potential customers to trust, without proof, that the auctioneer conducts the auction honestly.
To achieve greater transparency, the user could instead create a smart contract that executes the auction automatically. She would program the smart contract with the ability to deliver the item to be sold and with rules about minimum bids and bidding deadlines. She would also specify what the smart contract is to do at the end of the auction: send the winning bid amount from the winner to the seller’s account and transfer the land title to the winner.
Because the blockchain is publicly visible, anyone with suitable expertise could check that the code in the smart contract implements a fair and valid auction. Auction participants would only need to trust the correctness of the code. They wouldn’t need to rely on an auctioneer to run the auction honestly – and as an added benefit, they also wouldn’t need to pay high auctioneer fees.
Handling confidentiality
Behind this compelling vision lurk many technical challenges. The transparency and accountability of a fully public ledger have many benefits, but are at odds with confidentiality. Suppose the seller mentioned above wanted to conduct a sealed-bid auction or conceal the winning bid amount? How could she do this on a blockchain that everyone can read? Achieving both transparency and confidentiality on blockchains is in fact possible, but requires new techniquesunder development by researchers.
Another challenge is ensuring that smart contracts correctly reflect user intent. A lawyer, arbiter or court can remedy defects or address unforeseen circumstances in written contracts. Smart contracts, though, are expressly designed as unalterable code. This inflexibility avoids ambiguity and cheating and ensures trustworthy execution, but it can also cause brittleness. An excellent example was the recent theft of around $55 million in cryptocurrency from a smart contract. The thief exploited a software bug, and the smart contract creators couldn’t fix it once the contract was running.
Bitcoin is a proof of concept of the viability of blockchains. As researchers and developers overcome the technical challenges of smart contracts and other blockchain innovations, marveling at money flying across the Atlantic will someday seem quaint.
Authors: Ari Juels, Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs Technion-Cornell Institute, Cornell Tech, and Co-Director, Initiative for CryptoCurrencies and Contracts (IC3), Cornell University; Ittay Eyal, Research Associate, Computer Science and Associate Director, Initiative For Cryptocurrencies and Contracts (IC3), Cornell University.
Google’s Android Pay mobile payments system has arrived in Australia with American Express and Visa cards first off the rank, with MasterCard to be added “in a few days”.
Like Apple Pay, Android Pay uses the combination of NFC and tokenisation to allow a mobile phone to be used in place of a contactless payment card. And there’s a mechanism for in-app payments, again like Apple Pay.
The first round of Australian financial institutions backing Android Pay are American Express, ANZ, Bank Australia, Bank of Sydney, Beyond Bank, CAPE Credit Union, Central West Credit Union, EECU, First Option Credit Union, Goulburn Murray Credit Union, Holiday Coast Credit Union, Horizon Credit Union, Intech Credit Union, Laboratories Credit Union, Macquarie Bank, Mystate Bank, Northern Inland Credit Union, People’s Choice Credit Union, QT Mutual Bank, Queenslanders Credit Union, South West Slopes Credit Union, Sydney Credit Union, Teachers Mutual Bank, The Mac, The Rock, WAW Credit Union Co-Operative, Woolworths Employees’ Credit Union, and Wyong Shire Credit Union.
And “coming soon” are Bank of Melbourne, Bank SA, Bendigo Bank, RAMS, St George Bank, and Westpac.
NAB and Commonwealth are notable by their absence, but both have their own mobile payment apps already (NAB, CBA).
Early adopters of in-app Google Pay include Catch of the Day, GoCatch, Jetstar, Kogan and Menulog.
The Google Pay app is supposed to work with any non-rooted NFC-enabled Android device running KitKat 4.4 or later. But there are some reports that it is not working with all phones meeting that specification.
Blockchain technology is being developed in everything from financial technology companies to the GLAM industries. Some, such as Backfeed, are using blockchain for decentralised coordination through smart contracts. As the recent attack on the DAO has revealed, blockchain-based innovations can also create social harm by being difficult to fix when things go wrong. While it is likely that platforms such as Ethereum will evolve to deal with these risks, a further consideration is who will reap the benefits of blockchain applications in the long term. To understand that, we need to consider the infrastructures on which these technologies are run and accessed, not just the code.
Originally developed to support bitcoin, Blockchain is essentially a public ledger. It’s like a giant spreadsheet for recording assets, which can be utilised for any form of exchange and which no individual entity controls. By providing a secure and distributed means of authentication and recording, Blockchain eliminates the need for intermediaries that pull information to verify transactions. The technology can therefore be used for autonomous machine-to-machine communications, taking the Internet of Things and the sharing economy to the next level (for instance, cars that manage their own rental and re-fuelling).
However it could also be applied in sharing economies that are present in some developing communities, just like the one I observed during field work in the Kedaya Telang Usan area in Sarawak, Malaysia.
The sharing economy of the Orang Ulu
In a sharing economy, people make use of their excess assets by charging others to access them – houses for holiday accommodation, garages for storage, cars (and their drivers) for rides.
During British colonial rule, the Orang Ulu began to grow crops for profit not just for subsistence, and out of this came the kinds of payment for services that characterise the sharing economy. One of my fellow researchers, Simpson Njock, a Kenyah man from the region, said it was once the case that you had to share a wild boar, but now if someone asks you for some of your wild boar you say to them “how much?”
Until logging roads were built a decade ago, it would take the Orang Ulu days to get to their kampung (village) by longboat. As only a small number of people in each kampung own a car, the Orang Ulu developed a ride-sharing system, whereby you pay someone with a ute to take you where you need to go – a lot like ride sharing service Uber but without the internet platform. In another example, the house of the headman may include rooms for those on their way upriver.
These systems have also developed in a region where many fall into the unbanked category (those without bank accounts or credit) and live a largely subsistence lifestyle, but where money is required for schooling, medical treatment, and home maintenance. Many make that money from handicrafts or food they have grown on their padi farms. Some goods are bartered rather than sold.
A different form of international development
Using technology in development projects has been controversial, with research showing some projects reinforce exploitative economic and political hierarchies whilst claiming to encourage entrepreneurship from the so-called “bottom of the pyramid”.
Blockchain will not necessarily resolve the complexities of the development industry, but it might assist the coordination of existing systems, making them more efficient, rather than imposing different ones. For instance, it could make possible a shift from forest industries, such as logging and oil palm, to economies that rely on a healthy forest, where natural heritage and culture are valued rather than diminished. In the nearby Bario region, a technology project has helped facilitate local tourism since 1998, primarily through websites that promote home stays.
Technology is already changing life in remote Sarawak, enabling people to coordinate car rides and handicraft sales through instant messaging and social media. Emerging peer-to-peer platforms could be of significant further economic benefit through more efficient and automated systems, without the high transaction costs or standards required by commercial platforms.
The most interesting and important blockchain transformations could be those built for economies that have been underserved by established financial institutions and classified as ‘informal’. Current blockchain debates are focused on the conflicts between law and automated governance. We need to remember that there are many spheres of interaction that have not be well served by markets, regulations and institutions, which could benefit from technologies that reduce the need to interact with them while providing simple, trusted transactions.
Such possibilities are a long way off, and not just because of bugs in the code. For these technologies to run, there must be reliable connectivity and infrastructure. While some communities have mobile broadband base stations, we found that these are often poorly maintained or suffering from congestion. The possibilities for economic development via blockchain applications will be nothing more than an idealistic and novel concept unless more fundamental digital infrastructure needs are addressed.
Author: Ellie Rennie, Deputy Director, Swinburne Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University of Technology
Ethereum, a network designed to extend blockchain technology to uses beyond crypto-currencies, has been gaining traction around the world.
Billed as “a decentralized platform that runs smart contracts…without any possibility of downtime, censorship, fraud or third party interference,” Ethereum has been enthusiastically embraced by organisations like Microsoft, IBM and Azure.
How then does the equivalent of tens of millions of dollars get stolen in one day, from an individual account?
This is the situation that those affiliated with The DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization) awoke to on June 17 as transactions were made from their Ethereum account to an account whose owner is unknown.
It was a timely reminder that sometimes “smart” technology acts stupidly. Bitcoin suffered a near-death experience in 2014 when the equivalent of US$450 million in bitcoins went missing after Mt. Gox declared bankruptcy. Ethereum now faces a similar moment.
Important lessons about the risks, true capabilities and need for better governance of blockchain networks unfortunately have to be learned once again.
How Ethereum and The DAO work
Started in 2014 by teenage programming prodigy Vitalik Buterin, the Ethereum network is unique for its pioneering use of “smart contracts”. Just like regular contracts, terms and conditions are developed and agreed upon by consenting parties. What makes them supposedly “smart” is that, when the conditions of the contract are met, the contracts execute automatically.
The DAO is an online, investor-directed venture capital fund built on the Ethereum blockchain network. The DAO’s goal is to collectively channel investment into new projects, similar to the way that crowdfunding works, but using Ether, the crypto-currency that underpins Ethereum. It uses specialised code (based on Ethereum’s Solidity language) to allow its members to execute automated investment decisions.
After raising 10.7 million ether (the equivalent of US$120 million in May 2016) in an initial crowdfunding effort, one of the biggest in history, hopes were high for The DAO.
Then, on June 17, crisis struck. An unknown person or group of people funnelled out about one-third of The DAO’s ether holdings the equivalent of between US$45 million and $77 million (the value depends on whether one uses the pre- or post-incident ether market price).
In the fallout of the incident, much was made about how The DAO was “hacked”. Upon closer examination though, The DAO was not hacked at all. The attacker(s) used two features of The DAO’s specialised code to siphon out ether in amounts small enough to not result in the destruction of their DAO tokens.
Moreover, The DAO’s terms and conditions do not permit theft or fraud. In short, it is perfectly legitimate to do whatever a smart contract’s code permits, even if this is beyond the original intention of those who wrote the code.
Like all technologies, “smart contracts” are dual use and might be used in ways that their creators did not intend. The complexity of the technology only compounds this issue.
When considered in this context, not only is what occurred above board (though not in the spirit of The DAO), funnelling money out of The DAO’s account ironically turns out to be a feature, not a bug.
Important decisions now face the Ethereum community. The fate of the network and the equivalent of hundreds of millions of dollars hang in the balance.
Sensibly, a backstop mechanism was built into the Ethereum network for incidents such as this one. The account holding the (mis)appropriated funds (a so-called Child DAO) has been frozen for 27 days and soon the Ethereum community will hold a referendum of sorts, “voting” on what course of action to pursue. This will determine whether holders of DAO tokens will be able to recoup their lost ether, or see it remained locked in limbo forever.
Lessons for blockchain enthusiasts
This episode introduces nuance to Ethereum’s pitch on enabling applications to run “without any possibility of downtime, censorship, fraud or third party interference”. Similar claims are made by the promoters of crypto-currencies and blockchains more generally.
Smart contracts may run exactly as programmed but this does not mean that they will run as the creators intended. The DAO incident demonstrates how the complexity of these contracts is outstripping the comprehension of the people who wish to write them. This in turn introduces bugs and vulnerabilities, some of which are known, but others will only become known when something goes wrong.
While the Ethereum network’s users might be decentralised, certain features of the network are not. For instance, the decision as to what changes will be made to the code as a part of the upcoming referendum is determined by a small group of Ethereum developers. The check on this concentration of control is that 51% of nodes in the network must agree to the changes.
However, a 51% threshold is not ideal given the network’s tendencies towards centralisation. The difference between the Ethereum blockchain network vs a referendum is that the former is not “one person, one vote” it is “one node, one vote”.
For Ethereum, there is no telling how many people control how many nodes. This is because the account holders are pseudonymous. What is known is that the distribution of ether holdings is heavily skewed across accounts. At present, of a total of 440,741 accounts, the top five Ethereum accounts alone possess 25% of the total outstanding ether. Moreover, the distribution of mining is also not uniform. Three mining pools currently occupy more than 50% of Ethereum’s mining capacity. Amassing 51% of the required resources for control becomes relatively easier under such a configuration. For Bitcoin, where votes are determined by the distribution of mining, and mining is similarly distributed, the ability to game the network is even greater.
Smart contracts require smarter governance
If blockchains are to be sustainable in the long run, serious consideration of appropriate governance mechanisms is needed.
A skewed distribution of mining power and crypto-currency holdings is combined with pseudonymity of account holders and a strong incentive to game the system. This has all the makings for deceptive, unaccountable, fraudulent, and self interested decision making.
Until hard questions around governance of blockchains are asked, and solutions implemented, we should brace ourselves for more incidents like that which has befallen The DAO. At stake is not just the fate of projects like Ethereum but the future potential of blockchain technology more generally.
Author: Benjamin Dean, Fellow for Cyber-security and Internet Governance, School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
ANZ says today it became the first major bank to launch Android Pay in Australia. ANZ customers can now use Android Pay to make simple and secure purchases wherever contactless payments are accepted with either an ANZ Visa debit or credit card, or an ANZ American Express credit card.
ANZ Chief Executive Officer Shayne Elliott said:
Being the first major bank in Australia able to offer Android Pay is another important milestone for ANZ as we work to build the best digital bank for our customers. Given Android is the most popular smart phone operating system in Australia, we know today’s announcement will be well received by both our retail and merchant customers.
Google Senior Director Product Management Pali Bhat said:
We’re excited to bring the simplicity and security of mobile payments to ANZ customers with Android Pay. “Using Android Pay is more secure – and much faster – than rummaging through your wallet for a plastic card. Starting today, people will be able to use their Android device to pay at almost 800,000 contactless payment terminals in Australia.
ANZ customers with an eligible Android device can now choose Android Pay or ANZ Mobile Pay at retailers that accept contactless payments anywhere in Australia. Android devices with the KitKat operating system or later can use Android Pay through the Near Field Communication chip in the phone or tablet to make purchases. Android Pay uses tokenisation security to generate a unique number for each purchase so customer card details are never actually shared with the retailer directly.
Most people agree we do not need to know how a television works to enjoy using one. This is true of many existing and emerging technologies. Most of us happily drive cars, use mobile phones and send emails without knowing how they work. With this in mind, here is a tech-free user guide to the blockchain – the technology infrastructure behind bitcoin, and many other emerging platforms.
What does the blockchain do?
The blockchain is software that stores and transfers value or data across the internet.
What can I store and transfer using the blockchain?
To use the blockchain, you will need to set up an account or address (a virtual wallet). At this time, the most popular use for the blockchain is to make micro-payments with virtual currencies. For example, you can buy bitcoin with real money and then spend it on the internet using the blockchain.
Authorising a payment using the blockchain is similar to using a credit card to buy something online. Instead of a 16-digit credit card number, you provide the vendor with a unique string of numbers and letters generated for each transaction. With this unique identifier, the blockchain can verify and authenticate the transaction.
Can I use the blockchain to transfer real money?
Not yet. Some companies are using the blockchain to make international financial transfers, but most of these transactions are enabled by bitcoin or other digital currencies. Exchanging real money for bitcoin incurs fees for the sender, but the benefit is speed, security and convenience.
How is transferring value or virtual currency on the blockchain different from transferring money from my bank account?
Depending on the amount and the destination, when you transfer money from your bank account, your bank will limit the amount you can transfer. Most banks impose daily limits for all transactions. When you use virtual money on the blockchain, there are no limits.
When you transfer value or currency from your bank account to an account with a different bank or other financial institution, the transfer can take days. When you use the blockchain, the transfer is immediate. If a transfer from your bank account puts your account into debit, your bank will charge you a fee. The blockchain will not allow a transfer in excess of your balance and so your virtual wallet will never be in debit.
How is storing value using the blockchain different from keeping my money in a bank account?
Bank accounts and credit cards are vulnerable to attack from fraudsters and hackers. The blockchain is a more secure way to store and transfer funds, particularly if you keep a modest value in your virtual wallet. Hacking the blockchain is difficult, time-consuming and expensive. No one breaks into Fort Knox for just $500. Of course, value stored on the blockchain will not earn you interest or improve your credit rating; and the blockchain will not lend you money to buy a house or car. The blockchain does not replace your bank, but very soon banks will be using the blockchain too.
How is transferring data using the blockchain different to attaching a file to an email?
Unlike emails with attachments, the blockchain enables the immediate transfer of data no matter how big the file. Also, there is less danger of spam or viruses and no need for firewalls or junk folders.
How is storing data using the blockchain different to storing my files on my computer?
If you lose or break your computer or if it is attacked by a hacker or virus, you could lose that data. The blockchain resides in the cloud. Like any web-based storage, you just need your username and password to access your data from anywhere anytime.
What else can I use the blockchain for?
Very soon the blockchain will be used for online transactions. It will enable smart contracts, crowdfunding and auctions. It will verify the provenance of artworks and diamonds; transfer title to real estate and other assets; and store information about people, products and property. Apps for music distribution, sports betting and a new type of financial auditing are also being tested.
Why is the blockchain described as “riskless”?
The blockchain verifies and authenticates both ends of each transaction. It will not release a purchaser’s funds until it has checked that the vendor will deliver as promised.
Is the blockchain safe?
Standards and regulations are needed so that the technology can be readily used across different organisations, industries and jurisdictions. Blockchains can be private (like an email) or public (like Facebook), so users need to know which type is being operated before joining a new blockchain.
My tips for safe use of the blockchain are: keep your virtual wallet details secure; do not let an unknown third party hold virtual currency or data for you; and do not provide your online banking details to anyone. As seen in a recent attack on a crowdfunding project, the blockchain is at its most vulnerable when significant value is stored in a single address. The blockchain may be trustworthy, but the people on it might not be.
Author: Philippa Ryan, Lecturer in Civil Practice and Commercial Equity, University of Technology Sydney
According to The Australian Business Review, PayPal Working Capital has extended more than $85m to about 3,000 small businesses since launching in Australia in late 2014.
In contrast, Prospa — the biggest “fintech” online small business lender — in May revealed it had cracked the $150m mark after four years of operations.
SocietyOne, the biggest “marketplace” lender, which has also been in business for four years, pushed through $100m personal loans in April.
There’s a one-off upfront fee and repayments come out of daily sales, typically between 10 per cent and 30 per cent of turnover.
Interest rates are typically in the “teens and 20 per cent” range, differing based on merchants’ repayment choices and risk.
Including the US and Britain, PayPal Working Capital recently surpassed $US2 billion ($2.6bn) in loans. While Australia makes up a small piece of the pie, the business is profitable.
Online property exchange PEXA says the introduction of legislation allowing online property conveyancing in South Australia makes buying and selling property in the state easier, with conveyancers, solicitors, banks, credit unions and mutuals now able to digitally exchange property.
The SA state government e-conveyancing legislation took effect on Monday after 150 years of “pen and paper” conveyancing processes.
PEXA chief executive Marcus Price says e-conveyancing will bring South Australian consumers fast, safe and efficient transactions.
“People buying and selling homes will increasingly become aware that there’s a better way to exchange property that diminishes delays and other pain points associated with manual settlements.
“I congratulate and thank Brenton Pike for driving this innovation and reform as SA registrar-general and, nationally, in his role as chairman of the Australian Registrars’ National Electronic Conveyancing Council.
“Going digital puts an end to costly cheques and piles of documents. Crucially, conveyancers and solicitors acting on behalf of buyers and sellers can say goodbye to sitting on hold in bank call centre queues and travelling to Grenfell Street to attend settlement.
“Like the ASX did for the exchange of shares, PEXA removes manual processes and paperwork when exchanging property. Land registries, financial institutions and practitioners all transact together, online via a secure platform with funds settling through the Reserve Bank of Australia.”
Price cites a Core Logic RP Data report valuing South Australia’s property industry at $228 billion, and says the industry now has an inclusive, collaboration tool that brings the conveyancing and legal profession unprecedented connectivity.
“Importantly, 80 financial institutions have signed up to PEXA. A growing number are now actively transacting. In addition, an increasing number of practitioners are inviting their peers to join the network. More than 2500 have signed up in the PEXA-ready states. This will increase with SA coming on board.”
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has today commenced a public inquiry into whether the wholesale asymmetrical digital subscriber line (ADSL) service should continue to be regulated.
The ACCC first declared access to the wholesale ADSL service in February 2012. The ACCC is required to review the declaration before it expires in February 2017.
ADSL technologies provide high speed fixed-line broadband services over copper networks. ADSL services are currently the dominant fixed-line broadband technology in Australia.
“A number of changes have occurred since the wholesale ADSL service was first declared in 2012, including the progressive rollout of the National Broadband Network,” ACCC Commissioner Roger Featherston said.
“This inquiry will assist the ACCC in determining whether continued declaration of the wholesale ADSL service is in the long-term interests of end users.”
The discussion paper issued today seeks submissions on a range of issues relevant to the inquiry. Submissions are invited by 29 July 2016. The submissions will inform the ACCC’s decision-making.
The ACCC expects to finalise its decision in early 2017 before the current declaration expires.
Background:
The ACCC can declare a service if it is satisfied that doing so would promote the long-term interests of end users. Once a service is declared, a network owner must provide access to the service upon request and where commercial agreement cannot be reached the ACCC must determine regulated price and non-price terms. Declaration ensures all service providers have access to the infrastructure they need to supply competitive communications services to end-users.
