Topic: All crypto with an IPO/ICO is trash - no exceptions. Just launch fairly. (Read 3041 times)

Why don't we get a list of legitimate, non-premine, non-ICO/IPO coins and put it in the OP?  If I miss any, let me know.  Off the top of my head I can think of things like Bitcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin, Primecoin, Monero, Aeon, Boolberry, Dogecoin....

I have said 1,000 times that having a reserved pile of funds in your control or the rights to them etc on the start is functionally more valuable then you all ever realize.

Reason 1,0000000000000000 why ICO's are scammy.

Unregulated is good. Regulation means Wallstreet (the underwriters, etc) is taking all the gains and selling you up river.


Insurance as a stability of income is guaranteed failure. No risk, no reward. Period. That is an inviolable mathematical fact. Sorry this is a high IQ point and I won't be able to take time to detail it right now.

The only time that insurance is valuable is for long-tail distribution risks (i.e. black swans).


Not for those with the necessary discernment skills. But for most of you readers, you will lose. That is the nature of speculation. The smart speculators eat the less smart ones.


No one is victim, because no one forced you to play.

Life is a competition. Everyone is trying to find a way to get theirs. You can hide in your closet if you want. Or you get out there and compete. The choice is yours.

Note I don't buy shit technology, so I wouldn't buy most ICOs. But I am learning that if I were speculating, I should buy ICOs with good attributes even if the technology is bit off. For example, I knew from the start that ETH's technology was flawed. I even told Charles Hoskinson that before he launched Ethereum. But I have since learned that marketing communication is worth a $billion market cap (which is not at all the same as a $billion cashed out!).

You want a world where everything is stable and fair. I explain in my audio recordings why that world can't exist (else nothing would exist). If you think you have created a uniform environment (e.g. "equal opportunity" bullshit), you've actually obfuscated that someone is raping you without you realizing it. I hope you take the time to learn, but it is unlikely given your ideological stance, that you would be open-minded to the natural law math and physics that I explain.

Re: All crypto with an IPO/ICO is trash - no exceptions.  Just launch fairly.

PoW is superior, but even more superior if it is being mined by the users and not by those who (HODL or) dump their coins to those few in the powerlaw distribution of wealthy who want to stack (HODL) coins.

The only valid role of crypto currency is not as a "better gold" (such a concept is oxymoronic, because gold is as evil as fiat ... ask me to teach you!) but not as a store-of-value rather as a more degrees-of-freedom unit-of-exchange.

Currency is always distributed according to the power-law distribution¹, regardless of the methodology which you use to distribute it (e.g. mining versus sales).

¹ A. Dragulescu and V. Yakovenko. Exponential and power-law probability distributions of wealth and income in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Those who purchased Rimbit via Indiegogo should be demanding a refund from their credit card company now, because the campaign violated Indiegogo's Terms of Service on Prohibited Perks, thus the tokens will now be scorned and worthless.

This $151,806 loss for Indiegogo and huge number of chargebacks jeopardizing their merchant account relationship with the credit card companies, will hopefully incentivize Indiegogo to take legal action against Marcelo Karlsson. Hopefully they will also report him to the SEC so they can hopefully begin an investigation into the investments scams in crypto currency.

I have an inkling this smallish scam may be the one that ignites the fire that brings down the entire ICO altcoin ecosystem.

Edit: the SEC has recently warned about those who are getting involved in these crypto-currency scams and I hope Indiegogo takes the SEC warning seriously.

understood your concern. So investing in the ICO/IPO is really risky. Especially for the average ppl, they don't have the inside information and any thing about the projects except the campaign materials provided by the so called teams. So if you cannot tolerate the associated risk, you'd better go away with it.

I can't recall when i have agreed 100% with a comment of yours 
Well said !
I couldn't agree more.

I am not against dev's getting paid.
But many simply want a job in crypto to pay their bills.
A lot of them simply are a hired gun..
How many well known dev's in crypto have worked on various projects for the $$$ no matter how bad ?
You old school Altcoin guys know what i am saying.

All i ever hear is how IPO's are 100% legit.. but i think they are not for sooo many reasons.
And when comparing i think they are a step backwards over POW.
We need to get the "Holy Grail" of Initial Distribution.. so far we don't seem to be too worried about it.
It seems like the smart minds in crypto just dropped the search because it was too hard and then settled..
on IPO's / ICO's

There is nothing wrong with getting paid and there are many good models for doing that. The unregulated nontransparent ICO model is not one of them.

I agree with cryptohunter on the ICO model being deeply flawed (even if it does "work" in a few exceptional cases -- that does not disprove the general rule) but I don't agree that banner ads can fix it.


Yeah its only half bad

To be clear PoW can be bad. The ultra-fast PoW coins where a bunch of insiders and pumpers rent hash and rape it for a day or a week does nothing to remove manipulation. Slow and steady PoW distribution over years is much harder to game, but arguably that too could be gamed by long-term monopolization (if it turns out that Bitcoin's largely-monopolized mining is not a temporary condition).

I think it is a free speech forum and I just expressed my ideas, not attacking anyone! You have a strong unreasonable bias! I don't need to provide any evidence to argue with you, which is wasting my time! Please stop shouting and act as normal human being! Just check you trust! You deserve it!

But surely POW if following a fair release set of rules.

1. advertised release time and date
2. low block reward at the start
3. diff adjusts quickly
4. long term mining

surely this is

1. far harder to game
2. far easier to see if it is being gamed.


ICO is total mask for what happens behind the scenes. With no rules at all.

POW is not perfect but it is 99% better than unregulated non transparent ICO with little advertisement and over in a flash.

Not too mention the other kind of ICO where they just run off 100% with the funds.

Some ICO try harder than others by a long way to ensure some kind of half decent distribution at the start.

There is nothing wrong with getting paid and there are many good models for doing that. The unregulated nontransparent ICO model is not one of them.

I agree with cryptohunter on the ICO model being deeply flawed (even if it does "work" in a few exceptional cases -- that does not disprove the general rule) but I don't agree that banner ads can fix it.


Yeah its only half bad

To be clear PoW can be bad. The ultra-fast PoW coins where a bunch of insiders and pumpers rent hash and rape it for a day or a week does nothing to remove manipulation. Slow and steady PoW distribution over years is much harder to game, but arguably that too could be gamed by long-term monopolization (if it turns out that Bitcoin's largely-monopolized mining is not a temporary condition).

Have you even once considered the gross excess of "shady pump and dumps" is enabled by the toxic, hostile environment for truly original, worthwhile projects that might need some good programmers to get paid?

Half ICO half POW not so bad.

MAIDSAFE ICO..? ETHERUM ICO..?  

I am tired of hearing about some promising new project, taking my valuable time to look up the [ANN] topic, dig around through lots of flashy graphics, only to find the topic creator going on and on about some elaborate and self-masturbatory IPO/ICO scheme.  The defenders of said crypto cry:


But the sad truth is that if your project really is as revolutionary as you claim, then it will organically grow to the point where just being a natural early adopter will make you fantastically wealthy.  Then when you 'make it' you will have the added bonus of not having your history tainted by some shady early investment scheme.  
  

I don't care.  With all due respect to Nick Szabo's genius, into the trash it goes.  They should have launched with a clean proof-of-work and a set in stone time for moving to proof-of-stake if they wanted to not have a joke distribution.  Maybe they will go to a jillion dollars per gas, but I won't own a single fart of it for the long haul.  That's not how you launch a world changing currency - that's how you design a scheme to get wealthy.  Crypto is supposed to actually mean something, and getting wealthy is just a side effect.
  
It especially irks me to see actually interesting and innovative projects like Iota's tangle fall victim to this IPO mess.  There are a lot better ways to handle an initial distribution, even for blockchains that technically require it.  The only exception to this rule is micro-premines solely for the purposes of technical testing (like Litecoin's 150 coin micro-premine).  
  
So this is my plea to you, the good programmers of tomorrow: Launch your blockchain with no premine or ICO, and make an honest go at it.  Maybe you fail, and that's ok.  At least your project will fail as an honest project remembered fondly by the community - not some shady pump and dump.

I think it is a free speech forum and I just expressed my ideas, not attacking anyone! You have a strong unreasonable bias! I don't need to provide any evidence to argue with you, which is wasting my time! Please stop shouting and act as normal human being! Just check you trust! You deserve it!

So you were about to tell me about the Sia premine/devmine/ICO/IPO?  
  
Also, my apologies.  I just heard you say the other day that you were leaving Bitcointalk until your project was launched, so I naturally assumed that since you have returned the project also must have gone live.  
  
Also, since you seem to be so knowledgeable about these things, when FinCEN and SEC guidance conflict - which takes precedence?   What if SEC guidance doesn't apply, or they haven't released any?