Topic: [ANN] Ethereum: Welcome to the Beginning - page 1263. (Read 2004026 times)
Hi I'm somewhat new to all of these various cryptocurrencies, I got into bitcoin somewhat recently but I've been able to understand some of the basics. After reading through everything about Ethereum it seems like a great thing the only problem is that as a completely new person I dont really understand how to get involved. Is it mining just like with bitcoin? If it is or if it isnt, could some please try to break it down to as simple terms as possible, what to do and how to start up etc, so that I could start getting more involved in the world of cryptocurrency especially Ethereum, it would be greatly appreciated. Sorry if I sound like a complete idiot by the way
How do i go about investing in the IPO?
Cannot find a link anywhere.
Send your money straight to the developers pocket. Cannot find a link anywhere.
I will, and then someone else will send me more money back to my wallet...
You got the link?
How do i go about investing in the IPO?
Cannot find a link anywhere.
Send your money straight to the developers pocket. Cannot find a link anywhere.
How do i go about investing in the IPO?
Cannot find a link anywhere.
Cannot find a link anywhere.
How you structure your offering says a lot about your motives (perhaps unintended).
Exactly. ...and Ethereum's motives did not seem pure
People looking at doing "IPOs" should look at how real startup financing and IPOs are structured in terms of liquidity protection for the investors and relatively little money generally going in right up front and more money going in later once some level of success has been achieved.
I'm not even talking about legalities here, just the basic economics and motivation of why startups are structured that way. In summary, real startups who are looking to create value will have no trouble with this structure (and will themselves be rewarded if successful) but get rich quick artists and other scammers looking to enrich themselves at the expense of investors will not find it attractive.
As a founder/startup, you want to align yourself with the former group not the latter. How you structure your offering says a lot about your motives (perhaps unintended).
I'm not even talking about legalities here, just the basic economics and motivation of why startups are structured that way. In summary, real startups who are looking to create value will have no trouble with this structure (and will themselves be rewarded if successful) but get rich quick artists and other scammers looking to enrich themselves at the expense of investors will not find it attractive.
As a founder/startup, you want to align yourself with the former group not the latter. How you structure your offering says a lot about your motives (perhaps unintended).
I'll sum it up for you
Great potential in this product, but a god-awful IPO was scheduled to begin on the 1st. Seemed awfully greedy on the founders part with the investors taking all the risk. Regardless of if the project failed or not, the founders would still make good money.
However, they have since delayed the IPO (and are hopefully restructuring it, because if they come up with something respectable this thing could really have a future) and so on the 1st there is a tesnet release instead.
Great potential in this product, but a god-awful IPO was scheduled to begin on the 1st. Seemed awfully greedy on the founders part with the investors taking all the risk. Regardless of if the project failed or not, the founders would still make good money.
However, they have since delayed the IPO (and are hopefully restructuring it, because if they come up with something respectable this thing could really have a future) and so on the 1st there is a tesnet release instead.
+1
The presale investors have to take all the risk of project failure, while the founders take none. Also, the presale investors will get their shares diluted every year by the mining supply coming in from Botnets and cloud mining.
Possible Scenarios:
a) Ethereum is wildly successful and outperforms BTC (despite its inflationary nature)
Probability: 30%
b) Ethereum is moderately successful(the technology works, but there are some security issues etc.. or adoption is low), out performs fiat but underperforms BTC(due to inflationary nature)
Probability: 40%
c) Ethereum - takes too long to come out with a viable and secure product. While competitors take the lead. All the while Ethereum's value dies a slow death due to inflation.
Probability: 30%
Why would I invest in Ethereum now and not in Ripple? Ripple Labs has around 40 people and impressive list of Investors and Advisors.
https://www.ripplelabs.com/investors/
https://www.ripplelabs.com/advisors/
Their platform and client are already functional and people are trading on it every second. This is a genuine question. I have a few bitcoins and I want to invest in the most rewarding crypto platform.
https://www.ripplelabs.com/investors/
https://www.ripplelabs.com/advisors/
Their platform and client are already functional and people are trading on it every second. This is a genuine question. I have a few bitcoins and I want to invest in the most rewarding crypto platform.
Someone else can probably answer this better, but here's one difference. Ripple is "fully mined" which means all the coins are already in existence. Actually that's not correct, as there was no mining, the coins were just poofed into existence. And they just happen to be under the control of the organization, which can sell, trade, give them away, etc, as it sees fit, basically controlling the majority of the supply. Investing in Ripple places all the trust in one corporation, not a decentralized system like Ethereum, Bitcoin, etc.
Ethereum will also be proof of stake to an important degree. So it's kinda` like Ripple in that sense but will also have pre-mine and regular mining. It's a hot mess in other words.
I'll sum it up for you
Great potential in this product, but a god-awful IPO was scheduled to begin on the 1st. Seemed awfully greedy on the founders part with the investors taking all the risk. Regardless of if the project failed or not, the founders would still make good money.
However, they have since delayed the IPO (and are hopefully restructuring it, because if they come up with something respectable this thing could really have a future) and so on the 1st there is a tesnet release instead.
Great potential in this product, but a god-awful IPO was scheduled to begin on the 1st. Seemed awfully greedy on the founders part with the investors taking all the risk. Regardless of if the project failed or not, the founders would still make good money.
However, they have since delayed the IPO (and are hopefully restructuring it, because if they come up with something respectable this thing could really have a future) and so on the 1st there is a tesnet release instead.
Oh crap, I have 52 pages to read in just a few days :\
Why would I invest in Ethereum now and not in Ripple? Ripple Labs has around 40 people and impressive list of Investors and Advisors.
https://www.ripplelabs.com/investors/
https://www.ripplelabs.com/advisors/
Their platform and client are already functional and people are trading on it every second. This is a genuine question. I have a few bitcoins and I want to invest in the most rewarding crypto platform.
https://www.ripplelabs.com/investors/
https://www.ripplelabs.com/advisors/
Their platform and client are already functional and people are trading on it every second. This is a genuine question. I have a few bitcoins and I want to invest in the most rewarding crypto platform.
Someone else can probably answer this better, but here's one difference. Ripple is "fully mined" which means all the coins are already in existence. Actually that's not correct, as there was no mining, the coins were just poofed into existence. And they just happen to be under the control of the organization, which can sell, trade, give them away, etc, as it sees fit, basically controlling the majority of the supply. Investing in Ripple places all the trust in one corporation, not a decentralized system like Ethereum, Bitcoin, etc.
Why would I invest in Ethereum now and not in Ripple? Ripple Labs has around 40 people and impressive list of Investors and Advisors.
https://www.ripplelabs.com/investors/
https://www.ripplelabs.com/advisors/
Their platform and client are already functional and people are trading on it every second. This is a genuine question. I have a few bitcoins and I want to invest in the most rewarding crypto platform.
https://www.ripplelabs.com/investors/
https://www.ripplelabs.com/advisors/
Their platform and client are already functional and people are trading on it every second. This is a genuine question. I have a few bitcoins and I want to invest in the most rewarding crypto platform.
Ill let someone else answer this, but from a personal perspective, im rea;;y getting tired of hearing about ripple
Why would I invest in Ethereum now and not in Ripple? Ripple Labs has around 40 people and impressive list of Investors and Advisors.
https://www.ripplelabs.com/investors/
https://www.ripplelabs.com/advisors/
Their platform and client are already functional and people are trading on it every second. This is a genuine question. I have a few bitcoins and I want to invest in the most rewarding crypto platform.
https://www.ripplelabs.com/investors/
https://www.ripplelabs.com/advisors/
Their platform and client are already functional and people are trading on it every second. This is a genuine question. I have a few bitcoins and I want to invest in the most rewarding crypto platform.
Thanks for showing up everyone! It was really nice seeing so many of you at the protest today. We really put a lot of pressure on this GS-Ethereum deal. Power to the people!
http://cphpost.dk/news/2-500-protest-against-goldman-sachs-deal.8473.html
http://cphpost.dk/news/2-500-protest-against-goldman-sachs-deal.8473.html
Good job warrior!
Quote
I say get rid of the premine altogether as it immediately dilutes investors Ether right from the start.
Raising money via an IPO AND 50% premine is what most people are complaining about...
There's been no good valid explanation for the 50% premine.
Actually there has been, if you read what Vitalik has posted and ignore the FUD.
The bitcoins go to developing the client, applications, and the entire ecosystem. Fifty percent of the premine goes to pay the founders (time locked) and fifty percent goes to endow an Ethereum foundation to maintain the code.
Look at XCP (which I've invested a small amount in): There is some serious concern in the community because nearly 2000 BTC have been burned, but only FIVE have been donated to developing the actual client. What if they don't manage to develop a nice, functional client with only four thousand bucks (5 BTC @ $800 each)? Then the $1.5 million in "investments" (burnt BTC) are lost.
So you have a dilemma. PoB eliminates the trust and fairness issue because the coins are destroyed and nobody gets them--and the result is that developers may not have enough money to actually finish the project. The IPO model requires trusting developers to handle funds (in this case, the invested BTC) but empowers them--through adequate funding--to create a viable ecosystem.
I did not say that 500BTC would be maximum investent, this could stay on level 30 000 BTC who knows maybe will reach it. But what I am saing is premine only from the 500 BTC worth. It would give for example:
Total Investentment 10 000 BTC (lets say all invested 1st week) = 20 000 000 ethers
Premine - 500 BTC = 1 000 000 ethers * 0.5 = 500 000 ethers
It would be 2,5% of fundraiser coins, fair enough for me
Total Investentment 10 000 BTC (lets say all invested 1st week) = 20 000 000 ethers
Premine - 500 BTC = 1 000 000 ethers * 0.5 = 500 000 ethers
It would be 2,5% of fundraiser coins, fair enough for me
I am newbie but realy interested in this project. I think that If they were expecting at least 500BTC from IPO and that would be enough for them, so why it would'nt be enough if ppl invest more? I would suggest premine 500BTC worth ethers = 10000000*0,5 for ther expenses no matter how much total investment will be. Or at least their % share should gradualy decerase along with the increase of the overall amount of investment. It would encourage more investors and give bigger chance for project to be succesfull - everybody would be happy 
I say get rid of the premine altogether as it immediately dilutes investors Ether right from the start.
Raising money via an IPO AND 50% premine is what most people are complaining about...
There's been no good valid explanation for the 50% premine.
I am newbie but realy interested in this project. I think that If they were expecting at least 500BTC from IPO and that would be enough for them, so why it would'nt be enough if ppl invest more? I would suggest premine 500BTC worth ethers = 10000000*0,5 for ther expenses no matter how much total investment will be. Or at least their % share should gradualy decerase along with the increase of the overall amount of investment. It would encourage more investors and give bigger chance for project to be succesfull - everybody would be happy
The problem is that one moderately wealthy person could invest all 500 BTC and end up owning all of the ether. You can't really set per-person limits, either, due to Sybil attacks (people making multiple wallets/forum identities/email addresses/etc. and investing with each). You also can't force everyone to invest via bank wire, which might provide some clues as to identity, but would create a "taxable event" in many jurisdictions. It's really a conundrum.
If anyone is interested, there's some discussion about this going on at /r/ethereum, including vbuterin (a founder).
I am newbie but realy interested in this project. I think that If they were expecting at least 500BTC from IPO and that would be enough for them, so why it would'nt be enough if ppl invest more? I would suggest premine 500BTC worth ethers = 10000000*0,5 for ther expenses no matter how much total investment will be. Or at least their % share should gradualy decerase along with the increase of the overall amount of investment. It would encourage more investors and give bigger chance for project to be succesfull - everybody would be happy
The problem is that one moderately wealthy person could invest all 500 BTC and end up owning all of the ether. You can't really set per-person limits, either, due to Sybil attacks (people making multiple wallets/forum identities/email addresses/etc. and investing with each). You also can't force everyone to invest via bank wire, which might provide some clues as to identity, but would create a "taxable event" in many jurisdictions. It's really a conundrum.
I am newbie but realy interested in this project. I think that If they were expecting at least 500BTC from IPO and that would be enough for them, so why it would'nt be enough if ppl invest more? I would suggest premine 500BTC worth ethers = 10000000*0,5 for ther expenses no matter how much total investment will be. Or at least their % share should gradualy decerase along with the increase of the overall amount of investment. It would encourage more investors and give bigger chance for project to be succesfull - everybody would be happy
Jump to: