ChainBLX collects your personal information only to the extent necessary to fulfil a precise purpose related to our tasks as an opinion based self-accreditation entity.
We do not reuse the information for another purpose that is different to the one stated;
We put in place measures to guarantee that your data is kept up-to-date and processed securely;
Under certain conditions outlined in law, we may disclose your information to third parties, (such as the European Anti-Fraud Office, the Court of Auditors, or law enforcement authorities) if it is necessary and proportionate for lawful, specific purposes;
We will never divulge your personal data for direct marketing purposes;
You have the right to access your personal information, and you can correct it any time.
We do not keep your personal information for longer than necessary for the purposes for which we collected it.
However, we may keep your information for a longer period for historical, statistical or scientific purposes or for the opinion based self-accreditation with the appropriate safeguards in place.
Cookies are short text files stored on a user’s device (such as a computer, tablet or phone) by a website.
Cookies are used for the technical functioning of a website or for gathering statistics.
Cookies are also typically used to provide a more personalized experience for a user for example, when an online service remembers your user profile without you having to login.
When you visit our website, we may collect some data on your browsing experience such as your IP address, the ChainBLX page you visited, when you visited and the website page you were redirected from.
This information is used to gather aggregated and anonymous statistics with a view to improving our services and to enhance your user experience as well as for security and protection of our community.
When you visit the ChainBlx website, we will keep the browser history of your visit for a maximum of 13 months. This information will then be deleted.
Social Media
We use social media to present our work through widely used and contemporary channels.
Our use of social media is highlighted on this website.
For instance, you can watch ChainBLX videos, which we upload to our YouTube page and follow links from our website to Twitter and LinkedIn.
Cookies are not set by our display of social media buttons to connect to those services when our website pages are loaded on your computer (or other devices) or from components from those services embedded in our web pages.
Each social media channel has their own policy on the way they process your personal data when you access their sites. For example, if you choose to watch one of our videos on YouTube, you will be asked for explicit consent to accept YouTube cookies; if you look at our Twitter activity on Twitter, you will be asked for explicit consent to accept Twitter cookies; the same applies for LinkedIn.
If you have any concerns or questions about their use of your personal data, you should read their privacy policies carefully before using them.
Complaint handling by ChainBLX
What is the purpose of the processing?
To investigate complaints submitted to ChainBLX in line with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 (OJ L 8/1, 12.01.2001, the Regulation). Complaints against Europol will be investigated in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/794. We will only use your personal data for the investigation of the complaint submitted.
Which kinds of personal data does the ChainBLX process?
We process the personal data submitted by complainants, and members. This will include names, contact details as well as the content of the allegations (insofar as the latter qualify as personal data).
What are my rights?
You are entitled to access the personal data ChainBLX holds about you and to have them rectified where necessary. In certain cases, you also have the right to have your data blocked or erased or to object to their processing. To exercise any of these rights, please contact us using our contact form. We will reply within three months.
Who can I contact?
contact@chainblx.com
Comments
Interesting. Thanks for posting. Looking forward to our experts opinion.
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
Info about this claim
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
Info about this claim
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
Info about this claim
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
Info about this claim
It was decided to release 2% of the funds. The jury voted in their opinion to release an average of 4% of the bounty and a median of 2% of the bounty.
Please see below for the opinion of the jury:Opinion 1 - it seems like more a figure of speech than a direct claim of $0 value.
Opinion 1 - Bitcoin Black could have chosen to use a different word to make their point as saying Bitcoin is worthless is obviously not true. Plus, the whitepaper did not provide evidence to support their statement. Partial bounty is released
Opinion 1 - Agreed that worthless is not accurate assumption, which can be drawn out of the two facts given in the WP. The correctness of the facts is not in doubt. Concerning that the whole subject is regarding decentralization it may significant reduce the value of Bitcoin, but no empirical evidence from the bitcoin exchange rate has been given. The WP should have avoided an absolute statement, but it was surly not intentionally misleading.
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
Info about this claim
It was decided to release 0% of the funds. The jury voted in their opinion to release an average of 0% of the bounty and a median of 0% of the bounty.
Please see below for the opinion of the jury:Opinion 1 - It seems clear that this a planed projects
Opinion 1 - From reading the quote and the text before and after this quote, they are just providing examples of what the ICO funds will go toward. There is nothing wrong with this
Opinion 1 - This is a small semantic point about phrasing that is not misleading.
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
Info about this claim
Not sure if this helps in the diligence, but take a look at the Bitcoin Black Twitter feed: https://twitter.com/bitcoinbio
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
"Join the biggest wealth transfer in history" yes their tweets don't do much to build a case for credibility
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
I see what you mean, but all ICOs create hype just like every other product launch. So I don't think they're doing anything wrong on Twitter. Anyway, the only question here is whether or not the whitepaper stands up to diligence.
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
It was decided to release 0% of the funds. The jury voted in their opinion to release an average of 3% of the bounty and a median of 0% of the bounty.
Please see below for the opinion of the jury:Opinion 1 - It seems plausible.
Opinion 1 - The claim does not directly address the quote. Never the less the quote is misleading.
Opinion 1 - I believe that there is a confusion in Bitcoin Black and Bitcoin. The whitepaper critiques Bitcoin and Bitcoin Black is separate from Bitcoin. In the claim, it seems like Bitcoin Black is speaking ill of itself when it is actually speaking about another crypto currency. No bounty is awarded
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
Info about this claim
It was decided to release 0% of the funds. The jury voted in their opinion to release an average of 0% of the bounty and a median of 0% of the bounty.
Please see below for the opinion of the jury:Opinion 1 - There is a Lot wrong with the quote from the whitepaper. But to address this specific claim:
The claim isn't clear. The BH must make clear specifically why the quote is misleading. My opinion is that the BH is correct in making a claim, but has not articulated the claim clearly.
Opinion 1 - bitcoin isnt worthless because it can be used currently, so it could have been phrased better
Opinion 1 - The claim does not address the dangerous 50 attack
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
Info about this claim
Quote: “ When sending a payment to someone, the transaction is verified by taking the difference between the send block and your current balance on the preceding block. On the other end of the transaction, the receive block would then add the amount to its account chain’s preceding block. The end result is a new block that records the updated balance of each user.
Under this system, the platform keeps a record of an account’s balance on its ledger, not a full history of all transactions like traditional distributed ledgers. This means that a block-lattice based network only has to keep a record of each account on its full ledger. Instead of maintaining a record of all prior transactions, the network only stores account balances.”
Claim : This statement quite contradict the purpose of previous accounts or transactions maintenance. In models of B2B and B2C, B2B are required to abide with law in holding the information with previous transactions and their mode of transaction with the receivers information either it’s a consumer or merchant (Business). In B2C model consumer is not legally required in most cases to hold information of his purchases but the merchant (Business) is needed to retain the information. So a detailed presentation of white papers in reflecting the models of B2B and B2C would avoid assumptions maintaining the current and the future transactions information in the platform. If the information is not held on platform then how does law support this BCB Ecosystem. Then how does BCB acquire legal approvals to appeal mass market system.
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment
@hermanthkmuppala , claims can not be submitted on a whitepaper that has already been accredited and the time for the submission of claims has expired already. There will be more opportunities for you to submit claims in the near future.
Like This Comment
Flag This Comment