I found out about ETH back in May when it was $11, I heard about it previously but didn't do anything till then. Back in May, ETH was hyped like crazy. No one could say a single bad thing back then because there was no ETC, No DAO hack etc... There was so many Ethereum fan boys who lash out the minute you even bring up a tiny concern about security, scalability etc...
Also I didn't care that I was buying from people who potentially bought at less than $1 and are making 10x profit, I just cared about LONG TERM potential based on MY situation. The price went to $20, I didn't sell at the peak but made some nice profit before market lost confidence. It will have a year long bearish market next year just like BTC did 2 years ago and then it will moon. There is no doubt in my mind that if the whole DAO and ETC shit didn't happen, ETH would be mooning along with BTC now and $20 would be considered CHEAP.
What does all of this have to do with ICN?
1- many people will dump when it starts to play around in $1-$5 range or $6-$10. But A LOT more people will buy at that time due the fact it has gone up in the first place!! Majority of people only act when a coin is being pumped because its confirmation bias and to them its a 'safer' investment. low risk = low reward
2- ICN devs are masters of their own destiny now. They literally have it all in their hands. They are the only ones who can mess it up from now on because it seems the whole community is on their side. My concern to be honest is they will rush the OFM platform which may lead to high security risk or glitchy website that always looks and feels like it is in beta testing. I was excited at first that OFM will be released sooner than we expect, but now I would much rather if they are more patient and release a platform that is 100% secure and tested.... Otherwise, the first news of any sort of uncertainty and then it is game over and move on to the next hyped up thing. Sure, there will be loyal followers, but the majority of investors (not just in crypto but in general) will dump instantly at the first news of uncertainty. I'm going to ask them about this at next AMA and fucking hope they don't rush this so we don't have a fucking ICN Classic!
+100Also I didn't care that I was buying from people who potentially bought at less than $1 and are making 10x profit, I just cared about LONG TERM potential based on MY situation. The price went to $20, I didn't sell at the peak but made some nice profit before market lost confidence. It will have a year long bearish market next year just like BTC did 2 years ago and then it will moon. There is no doubt in my mind that if the whole DAO and ETC shit didn't happen, ETH would be mooning along with BTC now and $20 would be considered CHEAP.
What does all of this have to do with ICN?
1- many people will dump when it starts to play around in $1-$5 range or $6-$10. But A LOT more people will buy at that time due the fact it has gone up in the first place!! Majority of people only act when a coin is being pumped because its confirmation bias and to them its a 'safer' investment. low risk = low reward
2- ICN devs are masters of their own destiny now. They literally have it all in their hands. They are the only ones who can mess it up from now on because it seems the whole community is on their side. My concern to be honest is they will rush the OFM platform which may lead to high security risk or glitchy website that always looks and feels like it is in beta testing. I was excited at first that OFM will be released sooner than we expect, but now I would much rather if they are more patient and release a platform that is 100% secure and tested.... Otherwise, the first news of any sort of uncertainty and then it is game over and move on to the next hyped up thing. Sure, there will be loyal followers, but the majority of investors (not just in crypto but in general) will dump instantly at the first news of uncertainty. I'm going to ask them about this at next AMA and fucking hope they don't rush this so we don't have a fucking ICN Classic!
Excellent post. Its only problem is that it is not on Reddit.
Better to wait another few months and release a stable, secured, and well tested platform than to be ahead of schedule
In that regard, it would be good to have a small group of testers that can provide feedback before the release (access to qa or any other pre-pdoduction version)
I thought that's what they're doing with rolling it out to a select few before December 28th.
I'm referring to OFM platform which was originally scheduled for release in Q3 2017 I think, but now looks like it will be there much sooner. 2016 has been great year for alts in terms of total market cap, however, it is heavily stained with hacks. Steem accounts were hacked within 2 weeks of release, DAO was hacked within weeks due to poor coding, bitfinex was hacked as well, more than $100 million has been stolen from people's accounts this year and they all have one thing in common, the underlying blockchain technology has never been hacked and is at least the same level of security as banks and major corporations (I think it is stronger).
However, the accounts that people have on platforms is what is being hacked. I have no concern for ICN tokens or ICNX tokens being hacked because I believe in the underlying technology. Also, majority of assets are stored in multisig cold wallets so the i'm not concerned about that either. I think once people are using OFM to trade and depositing fiat/alts into their accounts, hackers will try to exploit because they will be stored in hot wallets. They say there will be withdrawal limits which definitely helps, but perhaps we should also have accounts being 24/7 monitored for suspicious activities and maybe even have require manual confirmations for each withdrawls. It might make it annoying for people to have to wait, but the more layers of security we have, the more likely it is to deter hackers from wasting their time in the first place. Anyway i'll ask about this in their next AMA and we'll see what they have planned
Nope, OFM should release at Q1 2017 from the beginning.
Huge executional risk, HIGHLY doubt any team can build a fully tested and secured platform after two months of ICO ending. Would love to be proven wrong though...
Really? I didn't know that, I assumed they started development after Ico ended
