- LTO Network (https://t.co/LJUDzLMCb5) is a hybrid blockchain solution that connects to existing systems enabling efficient collaboration on complex and multi stakeholder processes. It is led by a great team of serial entrepreneurs.
1) Our thoughts on LTO Network
Not financial advice
- LTO Network (https://t.co/LJUDzLMCb5) is a hybrid blockchain solution that connects to existing systems enabling efficient collaboration on complex and multi stakeholder processes. It is led by a great team of serial entrepreneurs.
- Businesses don’t want an IT overhaul, but want communication with existing systems that only share process data and updates users via their own systems.
- LTO has had many high profile partners join the network. Recently, The UN released an open-source urban land registry for the Afghan Government: https://t.co/aakyqOJLa7
- Other high profile use cases include:
- Immutable, digitally signed PDFs with a verifiable timestamp using SignRequest
Executed legal contracts, hashed on blockchain via a smartphone using Quislex
- Going forward, continued emphasis could be put into business identities on the blockchain, solving KYC issues, a big pain point for particularly banks.
This increasing popularity has enabled LTO to collaborate with some well-established parties aside from the UN, including:
- IBM. Both IBM and LTO Network have formed a partnership with VI-D to deliver The Internet of Environments.
Leased-Proof-of-Stake:
- Rewards are transaction fees on the network corresponding to the ratio of your staked amount to the total staked amount.
- Foundation to create new products & services, e.g. one-click KYC for businesses and cross-chain associations, all while retaining GDPR compliance.
- Smart Contract are less readable by humans than a standard contract while still being open to exploits.
-Smart Contracts do not operate within a legal framework and are not enforceable by a judicial system.
- Live contracts allow easier integration with legal frameworks. LTO was built specifically to be EU GDPR compliant
- LTO has chosen to design more organic tokenomics. As the platform increases in health/users we see the intrinsic value of the token appreciating. However, it is possible the token price will not converge with its intrinsic value over shorter time horizons.
- As one of the first teams to bridge the gap between BC agreements and legal jurisdiction, as well as being fully GDPR compliant, we see LTO as being one of few blockchains fit to serve the BC needs of a wide-ranging group of firms. Growth potential is immense.
- Judging from expected transactions, we expect to see a healthy ecosystem driven by a strong roadmap and vision that focuses on real pain points such as SSIs
More from Crypto
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
