Topic: Ask Any Crypto Question - A Thread By a 6-Year Crypto Vet - page 2. (Read 672 times)

I'm not quite sure of the context of your message, but there is significant progress being made virtually every minute, every hour and every day. Failing in the regards to price is the most frequent metric gauge for projects, thus most of the context of this writing will be made about failing prices.

There are no doubt growing pains and there's a lot of projects out there that are in it for the money or cash grab, even projects on Binance. No single entity, business or person is immune to failures, but it's the lessons learned from failures that helps propel this entire space forward.

When I look at the progress that's been made this year, the trends, the types of projects launch and compare it with 2016-2018, I see a maturing ecosystem. Are there still scams, yeah (and forever there will be), are there shitcoins.... yeah, are there bullshit technical projects... yeah, are there virtually any type of negative remark anyone can say... the answer is yes.

There's no denying the implications. Because with every action taken, that's a step into the future; in which no one knows the outcome of. No one can predict what will occur tomorrow or what the next big blockchain will be, or what will been the eventual perceived outcome of crypto, but in the end, there's no denying of what blockchain can do, what legitimate teams are doing to create the future of mankind.



About failing prices:

I'm not going to get too heavily into this. But, as stated above, the number 1 metric for investors, supporters and virtually everyone is how well a crypto does on the markets. There are many factors that are under the control of teams and many factors that are not. What type of: exchange, lock-up, sale price, funding goals, projected mcap, circulating supply, who holds the cryptos, what the road-map looks like, is there code written, is there transparency, is there transparency of funding, who's behind the project.... and on and on, are factors that are completely in the teams control, and each one accumulates into the painting of what the crypto would look like on the markets.

Price of all cryptos is determined by Bitcoin still, if bitcoin falls, most alts will fall. If Bitcoin falls and altcoins miraculously climb significantly (the majority) then that's what most would call the fabled "alt-season" or dominance of Bitcoin shrinking by 3-10% in a very short period (any definition can be used).

There are also external factors from the outside, such as the world markets and sentiment of crypto vs world markets, the global market is at all-time-high, but nothing climbs forever and eventually there will be a recession occurring. I believe crypto in many regards has been behaving more and more like a hedge, like gold, against volatility in the world markets. There are many factors that point to 2020 as the year of crypto, but no one really truly knows this for certain.


Altcoins suffer from major problems as well, that's primarily the liquidity argument/problem.


There are many factors overall that paint the picture of crypto. In a micro perspective of 1 week or 1 month, you may see doom and gloom. But if you take a more holistic and macro approach, you will come to the realization of progress and forward-thinking... movement.

There are a lot of shitcoins and profiteers out there, thus many are getting burned at a more alarming rate. Thus it's critical to heavily understand what you're supporting, what the project is and make calculated decisions for your time, money or effort invested into any project. Things not going so well? Liquidate and exit the moment you do not feel right about anything, do not stick around and become a victim to the cost-sunk-fallacy. The majority of crypto investors are victims of this 1 single term that can almost define this space, at the current time at least and unfortunately. 

1) In terms of operational businesses, there are many that undergo regular periods of funding from outside businesses and corporations. So there is some nuturing from outside accelerators and etc.

2) It would be too early for an ICO conducted in 2016-2017, to have run out of funds in 3-4 years. Typical average around 20-50 million funding during this period. A lot of these projects may regularly sell off some their crypto for financing as well.

3) There are many decentralized projects, that are governed by a passionate dev or community behind such a project. These are passion projects, or projects that have legendary names. They will never truly die and their markets are still heavily thriving. Just because a coin is on top 50 mcap, doesn't mean that there's something working daily to propel the chain

4) It's important to make the distinction between crypto projects that inherently were meant to be decentralized and mostly have finalized code/infrastructure and projects that rely heavily on integration, business, adoption, marketing and etc. There's often a double standard, newer projects actually have to be active. Much older projects have the leeway due to the sheer adoption and recognition from legendary figures in crypto. So rules that apply to for example, an IEO that launched on Binance, has far greater expectations that lets say Litecoin. Ofc they are different beasts in many regards, but you get the point.



Sure, there are plenty. Ethereum, BNB, Link and etc.

Now there is a distinction to be made, implementation in the real world I'll consider it some fundamental integration among like Amazon's AWS or Microsoft's Azure, integrations as such. Technology is still in its infancy, so it will take time to fully the true potential and to utilize blockchains to the full capacity.



You can launch a project in any fashion you choose. I don't have a particular opinion on this, because there are so many methods to con people into investing or supporting a shit project that's launched. It's all on the users to do research into what really has been launch and to accept or reject that particular project.

The market will eventually correct itself. People will also eventually keep projects in check. Self Regulation & filtering of projects is occurring, at a slow pace, but it is occurring more so than ever.

As long as there's money to be made, projects will continue to launch to the end of time. This is an industry in itself, just like the clothing industry brands and etc.

Don't take the article at surface value, he's running a business. Clearly it's not in his benefit to focus on altcoins and may be easier to attract traders to a Bitcoin trading platform only (similar to what Coinbase's strategy was years ago). Either he's short-sided and pretty idiotic, or there's a clear intention and business strategy occurring.

In the end, a BTC focused only exchange has niches and in many regards is not confusing to get real-world traders on-board. It also gives him free publicity (which i suspect CT did this for free) and etc. There are also legal implications of listing cryptos, especially in the UK, with securities and all the legal stuff this year that been occuring. So he can cut his costs in regards to this. So it was a calculated business strategy to focus on core essential.

Anyone who disregards altcoins, knows little about what crypto or blockchain inherently represents: there's a reason Satoshi made Bitcoin open source, I don't believe even Satoshi was oblivious to the implications of knock-offs or further enhancements on what he created.


In Summary: Regardless, taking the article at face value makes this guy appear as an idiot. But, I don't believe the face-value of the article. There was a calculated move behind this and CEO just marketing his dying exchange, clearly he wasn't profitable from altcoins (he would of never de-listed them if they were) or was clueless in what altcoins to even list. Lastly, he can use altcoin listings in the future, when he has more capacity to examine some alts and their uses cases or for leverage, free publicity and marketing.


The CEO isn't trying to become a martyr to get his message across. He's trying to run a business and becoming profitable is his number 1 primary objective.

There is no such thing as an "emotional" move based on not liking something (in a good, successful business at least), everything you see or do has a calculate risk and benefit, everything. Even me being here, typing this, has calculated benefits for me. There is no such thing as a selfless act, or an act out of greater good in human nature; in one form or another, every action taken has benefited the individual who acted in one way or another (or was supposed to benefit the individual).

6 years is a long time enough and of course, you have experienced various cryptocurrency conditions ranging from how crypto is still underestimated to the bull market and now the bear market. Hopefully, I can also get many experiences and knowledge here.

I want to ask for your opinion,
The latest news is that Coinfloor will delist all altcoins including ETH and BCH, and they stand for Bitcoin only. The reason is that Bitcoin is the only proven cryptocurrency.
What do you think about this decision?
Is the Bitcoin-only that has been proven? For, I think that so far, ETH is proven enough and it has been used in many transactions with many benefits.

News sources:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/coinfloors-ceo-explains-decision-to-delist-all-crypto-but-bitcoin-to-cointelegraph

Firstly, launching a crypto/blockchain on the basis of Transactions per section is a marketing stunt for most. There is movement in the direction of sharding, basically framgementing transactions into smaller computational sizes, to perform higher TPS. To my current knowledge, every project that claims unreachable TPS limits are:

A) Just technical hopes and dreams in a technical paper
B) Can only do this in an internal environment, not in a practical scenarios
C) None of these blockchains have ever been tested for even close to what they proposal in a real-world scenario.
D) TPS and scalability are inversely proportional to security and integrity of the network. (This point has some outliers, but this is a general rule of thumb for blockchains and real-world payment processors).


Visa Quickly

Lets talk about Visa, the golden standard that is so heavily emphasized for blockchain crypto projects, the mythical benchmark that crypto teams often highlight. Firstly, it's a misnomer to state Visa can "handle 3-4txp/s" this is their peak load and rarely ever meet this threshold. The estimate on an average day is roughly 1500-2k TPS for Visa.

Concurrently, there is an intensive infrastructure that's monitored 24-hours a day, but individuals to handle security, and integrity of the entire system, across the world. This is a multi-billion dollar operation and up-costs of billions of dollars (ofc customer support all the way down to tech) Src: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/V/visa/operating-expenses. Regardless, you get the picture.


Crypto Salability

It's been a while since i recapped on some information about TPS, since indeed most are theoretical. For reference, I did some background research to get the latest data (at least as recent as possible). https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=tps+of+cryptos+cointelegraph a very good article and I'll reference it below.

Again, crypto is still a very small fragment of all "transaction processing that occurs in the real-world" thus, most blockchains will never even see 100 transactions being attempted at any given moment. This also coincides with the fact that many claims are made, but very few of them are actually validated. There's a lot of misnomers in terms of "what teams claim internally" and what's actually achieved and deployed on their respective mainnets.

There's a lot of progress in this area, there's no doubt. But again, only a fraction of blockchains will ever succeed in the end; in the near future sure a chain can achieve high TPS. Therefore, licensing of their tech or incorporating it into real-world frameworks is the ultimate goal (or should be) for most of these chains, since they will never be able to capture any market share or real usability of their platform.


In short answer, no it's not important, but it may be highly important with IoT being incorporated into everyone's daily lives. For payment processing, Visa is probably deeply invested in blockchain tech and will launch their own blockchain as they see fit, negating the need for any external small, unreliable and untested blockchains that we currently know of. Bitcoin still transacts 60% of all crypto transactions, there have been hiccups, but lightening network is a step in the right direction and ultimately is the type of updates and implementations that will occur with all major blockchains in the top 20-30; again, negating any efforts from smaller blockchains.

The first step is for these chains to be incorporated or accepted/affiliated with a major business, the second is actually being tested in full, in a real world scenario, backing up any ridiculous claims. Until that's achieved, this topic is a senseless topic in many regards, but a good discussion to have.


I highly recommend just researching real-world industries, what supply chains, payment processors (outside of visa) can achieve, what really occurs with TPS, IoT TPS processing and etc. There's a lot of information out there, but knowledge specific to this topic is somewhat limited overall. But I hope in essence, the basic understanding is there's a big difference between theroetical dreams, integration in the real world and being actually capable of achieving what's been claimed, while keeping the inherent integrity of what blockchain represents; and not creating a fully-fledged centralized system.

This is a very good initiative. I am sorry that I missed your earlier thread. Could you please explain why most or almost all new crypto projects are failing in all aspects?

I don't claim to understand the real-estate industry, but I do understand crypto tokenization of real-world commodities and (everything under the moon) and concurrently blockchain integration into real world industries. Again there are 2 sides to every crypto, the crypto/blockchain business and the business in the real-world. If somehow projects are in full force in both niches (specific to projects whom issue their own cryptos in the first place), then you're in the 10th percentile.

Sorry, this thread is not meant for a crypto review or overview to validate or discredit projects.  There are plenty of influencers and shills whom will gladly shill or give you a review of what you ask.

Hi tk808 since you know much about many flaws of real estate projects i think you should take your time to do research on Chellecoin project, i think their idea is different and something entirely new, i will gladly wait for your reply, thanks

if only 5-10 projects succeed in making a profit.
what about other projects that have survived until now, where do they continue to maintain their project, without profit?
no need to all say top 100.



It seems like you are a really busy person out there  


yes I agree with this one, because bitcoin is only created as a means of payment and there is no development process other than that.
different from alt, which continues to develop through new coins that come out, although most of them fail.

indeed


most of what I see now is number 2, they only focus entirely on crypto.
and has no real project.
can you say an example of a project from the top 50 that has an implementation in the real world or has real performance in the real world.


ok, this is just my opinion if all the teams or projects do according to the criteria you mentioned earlier or it is a mandatory requirement to launch a project., Will there still be many projects out every day?

I see a lot of Projects trying to achieve the highest TPS, some are thinking this is the most important thing they have to do (Quarkchain is an example).
So do you think this is necessary while the TPS visa is only 4000 but it is widely used?

ICOs and IEOs are just mechanisms to get projects funded. It's entirely on whomever is backing a specific project to deem it a success or failure. Mostly, this responsibility has been delegated to real-world investors, thus the amount of shitcoins isn't going away anytime soon.

The reason most alts fail, is due to factors that are often out of teams control. In conjunction, 80% of projects do not fundamentally know, understand or even how to maintain a successful crypto. Bringing in resources from the outside world, does not lend to a good crypto overall. Therefore, one of the most important factors is balance within teams. Some teams are more technically heavy, some teams are heavily community oriented; but a balance between both (for a start-up in this age) is a rarity.

There are only about 50-100 cryptos (if not less), that have any real shot of being around or successful 5-10 years from now; the common thought is the majority of blockchain and crypto's will eventually go away, or most engagement from teams will stagnant heavily (I want to make the distinction here that if a crypto is trading, a team can completely disappear, but that crypto could still be heavily traded, this was often the goal for earlier projects, creating a decentralized framework). In today's era, simply launching a coin will not be successful, therefore team's have to also present a business behind their crypto to further drive value and real-meaningful impact. The niches are saturated, this is why launching a POW coin, that is based on masternodes does not work anymore or lead to anything meaningful.


There is also problems with differentiating the intent of the team; which often many overlook. Is the team looking to create a decentralized system and then go away? Is the project going to be iterated on forever? Is the company leading down a path of profitability? Is the team reliant on their crypto for funding (by selling off supply). Nothing is infinite, thus resources are always finite for systems, teams and businesses who are not profitable. And believe me, only 5-10 crypto's to launch, are actually drawing a profit. Most businesses to launch make no profit and are reliant solely on their funding or selling off of their crypto.

Then we can get into discussions on how communities perceive the crypto, the token economics, lockups, investors backing the project and etc. There are so many discussions and topics to branch off what really and truly makes a crypto successful, but I personally won't have enough time to cover this very very heavy topic.


If you're gauging the performance of altcoins on the basis of this forum, then sure it's a good place to start, but there is infinitely more activity in the alt-coin space than Bitcoin. Bitcoin is just Bitcoin, you know what it is, it won't change much in 10 years from now. Altcoin scene is consistently adopting, evolving and driving forward real progress and adoption. By having hundreds of teams trying to capture niches, we become in a position that they are actually all of crypto heavily. Yes even scam/shitcoin projects benefit crypto, in some regard, through exposure and through eyes who may not have otherwised known what a crypto was in the first place.

It's all a maturing process, it's evolution and you're witnessing it all. The most important takeaway, is DYOR behind any project. Do not settle for any bullshit or red-flag. Because in the end, what makes a crypto project ultimately successful, is adoption and useability. Without people, crypto is worthless. Without an adoption framework, crypto is useless.

There are niche cases where certain blockchains have yet to capture or realize, or blockchains that will be purely for B2B real-world integrations, but in the most general sense, crypto needs adoption, liquidity and etc; to be healthy. Price is everything, because every crypto and blockchain team are still heavily reliant on how well their crypto does on the markets, for their own motivation and to ultimately gauge performance.




In summary, most people and business teams have no clue what crypto really is or what they are even supposed to do with it. Sure you can theorize the applications and have a plan, but more than often there are hundreds of missing puzzle pieces that only the most educated among us understand. Crypto encompasses several areas in the real world, from psychology, computer science, economics, marketing and a whole host of other fields. If all are not met, then the crypto is more than likely to fail. If teams focus solely on real world, then their project is going to fail. If you focus entirely on crypto, your project is going to fail. Balance in every field, from understanding core crypto concepts and behaviors to real world adoption and use-cases.




this post is a bit fragmented, but I wanted to cover several basic ideas. There is a lot more information I could add and this could of been 5x in length; with a more coherent thought process. But I hope the takeaway is that, all core fundamentals need to be met in order to have a successful crypto. This takes both luck, strategy and highly experienced individuals who are incentivized or driven to make their project or crypto a reality. In most circumstances, this isn't the case. Hence the flood of shitcoins with novice and idiotic teams.

how do you see the condition of ico ieo or any kind of new alt in the future, where almost all of these alts fail.
your speculation how.
because I see that you are active in the ALTcoin section different from many seniors who mostly focus on BTC.
your speculation?

Hey Drai, Similar to the other post, a quick apology for the delay in response.



Ethereum from my perspective, is a usable crypto for everything; more so than bitcoin. DeFi, DApps and etc have been a highly popularized topic this year and the only platform that really can capture and have devs build ontop of a blockchain, is Eth.

Now, I do not personally believe Ethereum's time has come and eventually, as time progresses, I'm bullish in regards to Ethereum's valuation. In almost every regard, it's more friendly to users, than Bitcoin. The chain itself is highly adaptable and we've seen numerous of projects building protocols and etc on Ethereum. Almost every person I meet these days, perfers to get paid in ETH over any other currency, including myself. There's ultimately many reasons for this, but the biggest factor is the numerous of wallets available and how easy it is to send a TX, or recieve a payment, without going through most headaches. I know there are a lot of external services/wallets for BTC, but the nature of Ethereum makes it overall more accessible to an average consumer. This is my perspective ultimately and is purely opinion.


A quick quote from CryptoDiffer today, which summarizes Ethereum's ecosystem very well:





Ethereum 2.0 is what most are waiting for and that will address issues with salability. Ethereum's ecosystem as a whole as seen signficant updates and continued development interest over the years  - also real world business integration and affiliation, this will only grow due to the popularity of Ethereum as a whole.  (Read all about it: https://medium.com/better-programming/overview-of-whats-new-in-ethereum-2-0-cdf902e0220d)


In reality, I don't believe crypto will ever be as decentralized as everyone had initially thought. There's a reason for this, and that reason was due to equilibrium. If you're too far in off on the left side of the spectrum (decentralization, anonymity and etc) then you drive away interest, due to negative connotations. If you vere too far right (centralization), then you also drive away the appeal of blockchain in the first place. So the goldie-locks zone for cryptos is somewhere in between and for governments, businesses and etc to have enough trust in the people behind whatever blockchain was created.

In regards to EOS, I personally never found favor with it. Dan Larmier is a genius in many regards and I've had great admiration for what he's been trying to achieve, but EOS is only a fraction of what Ethereum will ever be, in terms of virtually every regard, aside from the technical sophistication of EOS as a whole. EOS is still probably 2-5 years off from actually being what it is supposed to be and what initially promised; by then it may be too late, but EOS will never truly die. Don't get me wrong, there are great advantages of EOS, it's just not that widely accepted; it's very niche currently.

Ethereum's value is derived on one fundamental principal (similar to Bitcoin) it was the first, most widely accepted and most usable blockchain in terms of being able to add to the ecosystem (via SC's and etc). The ecosystem, DeFi, DApps, protocols and enhancements in conjunction with Ethereum only strengthen Ethereum in the end.



There were a lot of opinion-based judgements here, but I truly feel that there is no other crypto that will ever match Ethereum in any regard aside from salability, TPS, anonymity and some other regards. Even then, Ethereum's devs and community recognizes this and are moving forward accordingly to address these difficult problems. These are definitely growing pains for Ethereum ultimately, but all indications are leading towards a favorable future.

Hey Bttzed,

Firstly apologies for the delay in response. I had this thread on watch with notifications, but they went to spam unfortunately.


None in real-estate. Real-estate blockchain projects are mostly all scams. The situation with "tokenization of industries" is in a miserable state, especially with smaller companies seeking to take their own route instead of partnering with the giants in the world.

This leads to a very fractured climate, where not knowing who to trust and etc. The only way this industry will succeed, is by 1-2 of these projects out 100s? becoming affilated with big providers that list properties and handle transactions for such. Partnering with real-estate agents is a big part of tokenizing real-estate. Concurrently, if a project is listing their own crypto and listing properties for 200k+, how is liquidity handled? Who would want a random crypto currency that has no liquidity for their house?

I understand this space is growing and there is definitely a lot of room and niche's to capture to fully run a legitimate business. But don't expect a start-up to pave the way or grow into a billion dollar company. If a real-estate or listing platform wants to do something like this and they find it more efficent and friendlier to their home-buyers, then they will implement it into their already existing industries.


Progress is being made in virtually all sections of tokenization. We're still a few years off from tokenizing properties or anything that's not a commodity being fully realized, implemented and accepted among the real world.

You mentioned that you have been involved in 40 projects related to crypto/blockchain. Out of those projects, was there one that's into real estate? Whether yes or no, I would like to get your view on that. I feel that it's one area where blockchain could really be adopted and I've seen some projects that are still attempting to penetrate that market but there's no major progress yet.

Thanks for the opportunity, I have been active in Cryptocurrencies longer than you but I didn't pick any interest in Altcoins until very recently... My question is.. we all know the potential of Ethereum, it's past and present achievements (smart contracts, tokens), do you think that we have already seen the best that Ethereum has to offer or do you think that the previous achievements are just the tip of the Iceberg? We are reaching a stage where worldwide adoption is becoming more and more closer and I think the blockchains that would survive when that happens are those that can handle a large number of transactions and ethereum lacks this scalability presently considering the fact that it is built to handle just about 15 TPS.

I used to think it would be EOS but the recent spam attack they experienced that lasted more than a week has dissuaded me of that fact and let's not forget the fact that it's partly centralised to begin with... Anyways my main question is... Do you think we would be seeing a fully decentralised blockchain infrastructure soon that would be able to handle hundreds of thousands of transactions anytime soon?

Thank you aswell, i do truly enjoy writing on bitcointalk.

In regards to Bitcoin and altcoins, the short answer is no. There have been quite a lot of threads asking about altcoins and Bitcoin, a good thread to see what others think (not only me) is this thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52552146

But essentially, Bitcoin has been co-existing with altcoins since almost the very beginning. One would be foolish to say that Bitcoin would be in the same place it is right now, without altcoins (strictly in terms of adoption). If Bitcoin's adoption is significantly lower, so would its marketcap and its network hashing power. Thus, in many regards to Blockchain tech, blockchain would of been a failure if there was no one interested in profiting or having an entrepreneurial spirit in trying to create something bigger and better. In return, not only have altcoins done good for Bitcoin, but with all that manpower, capital flowing in and involvement, came awareness. All that money ICO's used, all those memes, shitcoins, scams and everything you can imagine that has been spoken, done or etc, has only benefitted crypto as a whole, it's simply because of exposure. Many people did not get exposed to Bitcoin first, they got exposed to some random shitcoin or to some big news about someone becoming rich, losing everything or again, anything you can imagine. Think of it like this, whatever action any altcoin took, had an impact on making crypto bigger.

Can it do all the talking in this climate? Not really, no. Because Bitcoin is the gateway drug, once you understanding mining and the fundamentals of what Bitcoin is, business look to more sophisticated and intricate chains. Bitcoin only fulfils one niche, but the world has several desires and niches that technology needs to fulfill, that's where you get coins like XRP and blockchains like Ethereum et al. Bitcoin is the easiest to understand, it's the easiest coin to be synonymous with the word "Blockchain" or "Cryptocurrency," thus, for the leman, it's easiest to always talk about Bitcoin. But in reality, Bitcoin is just one part of much larger technical and potentially social revolution, in almost every fabric that shapes our lives.



The fate of alt-coins in years to come is going to be legitimacy, integration and recognition. Leading into your last question, I said this earlier this year, when mainstream adoption, coupled with Bitcoin's halving occurs (which mainstream adoption is well underway for Bitcoin btw), then you expect an explosion of growth (this is speculation still).*

I'm going to quote myself from https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52653332 I just wrote this, it expresses many of my thoughts on this question and I don't really want to rehash it all:




From an economist POV, halving of Bitcoin's reward for mining blocks, with the same amount of energy being putting forth, ultimately values each Bitcoin greater. So the supply entering the total supply is being reudced, thus each Bitcoin in theory, should be worth more. More energy is being spent per Bitcoin and there's less of them entering the supply, thus the price is expected by many to change in a favorable direction.

Thanks for this wonderful opportunity to ask you question tk808, my first question is pointing towards altcoins entirely, can bitcoin do all the talkings in crypto without altcoins? what do you think will be the fate of altcoins in few years to come? will next bitcoin halving have impact on altcoins? thanks

This is a new thread, a follow-up from a thread created a year ago


I've been active within crypto, nearing 6 years now. It is my passion to share my experiences, talents, wisdom and assisting others with wisdom and insight into all things related to crypto. Over the years, I've been involved in over 40 crypto and blockchain projects and have been friends with some of the biggest legendary figures known to crypto. I've helped coins that still linger in the top 20 and many more that have been in the top 100.

But, this thread is for my beloved Altcoin community on Bitcointalk, whom I vigorously watch, read, merit and occasionally comment on your threads.



I invite you and anyone to ask any question pertaining to cryptocurrency and blockchain.

The only types of questions i will not answer, are those specific to a crypto, questions like "What do you think about Ethereum?" "What coin are you investing in?" ... etc.