But aren't we are going against the government with that approach by creating self motivated ecosystem? I mean its like owning the island and putting up your own flag over there.
Government might just overlook this for initial stages. If this kind of ICO gotten to much exposure and if the taxes coming from the such villages on foods and water supplies got cut off then im sure they will take legal action on them.
I mean different countries different rules but still who knows what could be the after effect of this all.
Topic: Crypto being unregulated is a strength and an advantage (Read 184 times)
On one side, it prevents fraud/scam and on another side, it really expensive. Without some kind of regulation, we will see more and more scam ICOs. There must be some balance between regulation and freedom.
Regulations don't prevent scams. The only thing regulations will do in that regard is cause a shift where it will no longer be amateurs setting up schemes and whatnot, but professionals knowing how to stay out of the picture for a very long time. The danger with this is that the current scams are easy to spot, but that later on won't be as easy anymore with how well set up they are.
I am quite sure that if BitConnect was run properly, it could have existed for years without imploding. It all comes down to how greedy and poorly operated they are in the end. These greedy baboons will make place for smart, conservative and well instructed entities that will legally scam you out of your funds.
Crypto ICOs is good without regulations but some projects are already taking advantage of this, if ICOs is to provide initial offering for those that are not rich then some ICOs already breach this condition. Taking Telegram ICO as example and also many other projects that consider less the not rich. Regulation would keep everything in track but as well it will give the regulating body too much power that will violate the aim of decentralization.
<...>
To a degree, regulated crypto implies only the rich having access to things like IPOs or ICOs and that is not the direction which bitcoin nor crypto currencies should take.
Agree / disagree?
To a degree, regulated crypto implies only the rich having access to things like IPOs or ICOs and that is not the direction which bitcoin nor crypto currencies should take.
Agree / disagree?
Regulation isn't necessarily bad. It exists for some reason, mainly for consumer protection. A company who wants to go for IPO has to deal with a lot of terms from the government. On one side, it prevents fraud/scam and on another side, it really expensive. Without some kind of regulation, we will see more and more scam ICOs. There must be some balance between regulation and freedom. It's not a binary scale 0/1 but more like a spectrum.
The government is afraid of decentralisation. They want everything under their radar.
I can' really see the picture of decentralization and regulation being in the same place it's like opposite sides of a magnet, that is why we are facing dilemma in the crypto society now. It is just starting and i bet they have more to do.
That maybe true, but then again i would.much rather join i on a regulated ICO. It will give me comfort that what I'm going inti isn't fraudulent and it will give my investment a protection that it won't fly away once the ICO is over. I know the strengths of having an unregulated ICO but a regulated one still supercede it.
Yes I believe so. Regulation could stop businesses from really improving on the businessman's view. They are there to make money and how can they if there will be too many Regulations? That is why I think people are trying to move on to cryptocurrency as a business because their is less regulation and they are free to do what they want and they are borderless with cryptocurrencies which means they have a wider scope than normal. Yet some concerns are also raised on the government side. The economy is always affected with the movements of money. Wether it is cryptocurrency or fiat, a country maybe affected that is the reason why they are monitoring or regulating businesses for the everyone's advantage. So for me it ia quite complicated really. I could agree on both sides.
In a sane economy, where everyone isn't for their selfish interest, this would be true but however in the world where we are, an unregulated space would be an ideal environment for scams and scammers
Definetely disagree with this, having access to ICOs is mostly bad for many investors because they are being scammed. I don't think also it is something for the poor or rich, it is ico and need to be regulated.
I definitely think so.
If crypto investments are regulated to the point that the average Joe isn't able to invest in a project without having to go through extensive background checks, extensive AML checks etc., and that is able to discourage him from investing, then it's certainly a negative. But it depends on how strict and what the regulation is, honestly.
ICOs are able to be invested in by everyone, and that is unlike IPOs which are only accessible to a select few big names.
However, can you really change the fact that the government wants to regulate crypto, and its related investments? I think it's hard.
If crypto investments are regulated to the point that the average Joe isn't able to invest in a project without having to go through extensive background checks, extensive AML checks etc., and that is able to discourage him from investing, then it's certainly a negative. But it depends on how strict and what the regulation is, honestly.
ICOs are able to be invested in by everyone, and that is unlike IPOs which are only accessible to a select few big names.
However, can you really change the fact that the government wants to regulate crypto, and its related investments? I think it's hard.
It seems to me that regulation is one of the forms of modernization. It is impossible to predict all the risks before the appearance of the coin. Then life shows coin weaknesses and regulation can correct this and make the coin more convenient to use and viable. But regulation by the state and banks is quite another. This can be more called an attempt to subdue cryptocurrencies.
Looking at how btc started and it's decentralized nature then yes, obviously regulation is not something that really fits that picture.
You're probably right when btc started out but as the market grows bigger and more people are into it, regulation becomes necessary to avoid or minimize illegal activities that through it. Regulation to a certain point is healthy.
At first, I kinda like the idea of ICO after the successful bout of ETH, but afterwards, many wanted to replicate the success by creating their own coin without providing any real value to its peers. In short, they masked profit-grabbing through ICOs and let people think that what they're doing is innovative and right. With ICOs being unregulated, people could just create it without a hitch, grab other people's money and get away with it. It becomes the safe haven of a money launderer if not watched over so no, I don't think cryptospace being unregulated is a strength for most people. Maybe for the dev of the coin, sure, but for peers and consumers? Certainly not.
It is likely we have the power for our own bitcoin for now. We see what are the advantages of havin unregulated crypto. We have the power and strength with our own bitcoin. We can do what we want to do, it is free for any kind of transaction.
That is exactly the reason why people patronizes bitcoin. If bitcoin is regulated then why don't we just stick to mainstream banking?
Looking at how btc started and it's decentralized nature then yes, obviously regulation is not something that really fits that picture.
I think this is one of the main reasons why the government's of many countries are not ready to accept cryptocurrency it is because the Freedom, that it has.
You have some good points there but if crypto currencies aren't regulated then you would still have this blockade between exchanges & banks. Thus regulation would be the only way to go forward for crypto to mature.
Unless you are paid in crypto for the work you do, you are still tied to banks. Since banks/governments are afraid to loose control of the money, this blockade will continue.
Unless you are paid in crypto for the work you do, you are still tied to banks. Since banks/governments are afraid to loose control of the money, this blockade will continue.
Any Kickstarter,Indiegogo,Gofundme crowdfunding campaign can do the same work as an ICO and I don`t think that those crowdfunding platforms are heavy regulated or it`s expensive to list a project there.
Actually it`s easier to create a crowdfunding campaign.With ICOs you will have to code smart contracts and do some other programming work.
ICO were unregulated in the past,now they are more and more regulated.I think that this advantage is gone.
Actually it`s easier to create a crowdfunding campaign.With ICOs you will have to code smart contracts and do some other programming work.
ICO were unregulated in the past,now they are more and more regulated.I think that this advantage is gone.
Jump to: