Why are ICO's which are developing a new technology better than those who are simply implementing a new technology?
If technology is only as good as it can be used, what is the general opinion for ICO's which will "use" new technologies rather than "create" new technologies?
I have seen posts such as ICO's are only for developers who are developing necessary technologies and need to develop their technology quickly. I understand this in theory however I see many ICO's (games, casinos, etc.) which I don't believe are "necessary" at all.
What about ICO's as "crowdfunding"? Isn't it more important the ICO leads to a successful operation AFTER the ICO finishes?
Topic: ICO's for Tech - Implementing vs. Creating (Read 182 times)
Jump to: