Topic: [ANN] Ethereum: Welcome to the Beginning - page 1263. (Read 2007155 times)

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).

+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%

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.

Oh crap, I have 52 pages to read in just a few days :\

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.

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.

Good job warrior!

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

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.

If anyone is interested, there's some discussion about this going on at /r/ethereum, including vbuterin (a founder).

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  

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

don't know where the hype for turing completeness is coming from but it is much more difficult, to find
a language (or even sub-language) which is NOT turing complete in reference to it's usage design.
anyway, the by far much more interesting question is how this semi-smart-code is sandboxed efficently
without loosing to much functionality. i doubt, using the current browser (javasrcipt) sandboxing as
a blueprint will work in a solid way. instead reducing the language to gain security the other way around
should be considered too. giving the code self-reflection/modifying capabilities could solve this. the best
language combination from my pov would be erlang (self-healing nodes, nearly unbreakable once running)
as bc carrier and lisp/scheme (self-modifiable) to add logic on top. in this combination you have ultra-tons of
turing completeness if you in the need...   

^This.

But seriously, Turing complete means that Ethereum will essentially be a full programming language, which can do anything that a full programming language can do. As opposed to Bitcoin, which can only do certain things as defined by its protocol--which was intentionally limited by Satoshi.

sure:

01000001 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01110000 01110101 01110100 01100001 01110100 01101001 01101111 01101110 01100001 01101100 00100000 01110011 01111001 01110011 01110100 01100101 01101101 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01110000 01110101 01110100 01100101 00100000 01100101 01110110 01100101 01110010 01111001 00100000 01010100 01110101 01110010 01101001 01101110 01100111 00101101 01100011 01101111 01101101 01110000 01110101 01110100 01100001 01100010 01101100 01100101 00100000 01100110 01110101 01101110 01100011 01110100 01101001 01101111 01101110 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101100 01101100 01100101 01100100 00100000 01010100 01110101 01110010 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01110000 01101100 01100101 01110100 01100101 00100000 00101000 01101111 01110010 00100000 01010100 01110101 01110010 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01110000 01101111 01110111 01100101 01110010 01100110 01110101 01101100 00101001 00101110 00100000 01000001 01101100 01110100 01100101 01110010 01101110 01100001 01110100 01101001 01110110 01100101 01101100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01110011 01110101 01100011 01101000 00100000 01100001 00100000 01110011 01111001 01110011 01110100 01100101 01101101 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01101111 01101110 01100101 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01110011 01101001 01101101 01110101 01101100 01100001 01110100 01100101 00100000 01100001 00100000 01110101 01101110 01101001 01110110 01100101 01110010 01110011 01100001 01101100 00100000 01010100 01110101 01110010 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01101101 01100001 01100011 01101000 01101001 01101110 01100101 00101110


01101001 01110100 01110011 00100000 01100010 01100001 01110011 01101001 01100011 01100001 01101100 01101100 01111001 00100000 01110011 01100001 01101100 01100101 01110011 00100000 01100110 01101100 01110101 01100110 01100110

ok ill bite, can someone explain just what exactly all this "turing-complete" compatible IS and how it works?  Explain it to the level of someone with a BS in IT and who has worked professionally in IT for 20 years as a network tech