Generally speaking though, all projects using another's name for the brand awareness, is a scam. From Bitcoin socks to Bitcoin cash, gold, diamond. All of 'em scams of various degrees. Same goes for litecoin and other major projects' copies.

Lol, you don't need a new coin for that one though. What you're talking about is just necessary infrastructure to permit an easier way to exchange fiat to crypto and viceversa. Look into dether for that. They've been working hard since their ICO and they have a decent, working product. It just needs adoption, which by the looks of their dedication, will come along. Shameless shilling, I know. But I actually have faith in the project.

I like the idea and the implementation. That being said though, does the app really need a token? I mean, what is the actual purpose of this token? I guess in a way an ICO would make sense for some crowdfunding to further develop your project, but you gotta provide a real usecase for the token. My 2 cents.

First thing I look at is the team. That's the point in which I decide to investigate it further, or stop wasting time. Reading the whitepaper comes next and understanding the use case. Does the idea actually need a token? Or it's just a quick money grab? If both of these are a go, I try to check the hype factor and the actual promotion of the project aka shilling. All of these together should earn some profits. More so in a bull run.

The violent fluctuations, the petty politics, malicious actors. All these points would argue for the contrary. Bitcoin can't really be a viable digital currency until the price swings drop to acceptable levels. Scaling is the other issue. Also the proof of work, which requires incredible energy resources. Lots of issues to overcome. We can't be sure it's going to be what we all dream it will.

I would argue that cloud mining is one of the biggest scams running in crypto. You definitely won't make your investment back in 6 months, otherwise why the hell would the company offering the service do this for you and not for themselves? What is the logic here? If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

It's great and all that you decided to accept bitcoin and other cryptos for this endeavor. However, I do have a question for you. Why would pornhub accept verge for the main website? Verge is one of the worst projects in top 30, if not the worst. A week before you made the "partnership" public, a bug in the code copied by sunerok from peercoin (because he can BARELY code himself) allowed a hacked to get around 200 mil xvg. Before being called verge it was called dogecoin dark. Do you see where I'm going with this? Why verge? Was it the 3 million $ bribe? I know it's not in your position to really know about this stuff, but I'd like an honest opinion from you and others here.


Verge is the textbook example for a LITERAL shitcoin. Insecure, nowhere near as private as monero, for example and copied along with bugs from other shittier projects.

When watching the cryptocurrency hearing in the US congress, something interesting came up: Coinbase does not list anything that has the potential to be a security. Only currency coins. I don't know how their position is about to change with the introduction of ERC20 tokens, or which tokens they'll introduce. I'd say eos between the two. Higher cap and not even completely released yet. Hopefully it will overthrow bcash from its spot when it does come out.

Indeed, not as easy as it sounds. Especially when greed kicks in...at times it feels like sexual urges, incredibly hard to control and not give in. I do not try to day trade anymore, because it's essentially gambling. I've made some lucky calls in the past, but got burned big time in some situations. I do have a portfolio with large positions in top 15 coins, largest being btc and eth, obviously. I ride the wave in bull runs and try to determine how close we are to the bubble popping. Exit everything, rinse and repeat when the market bottoms out.

What do you mean by it will stay 2nd to bitcoin forever? It's never even gonna reach second place. It will fade into obscurity as every scam that appropriated the name of bitcoin illegitimately. But I digress. EOS has the potential to the topple ripple and achieve number 3. What eth has going for it is the EEA which basically is the network of people using, building and promoting ethereum. I think that's as strong if not stronger than any better tech in the short to medium run. However, it depends on how much better eos will be as a platform. In the long run, it might prove to be a reiteration of the google vs yahoo fight.

Indeed. I thought about the fever dying out in 2018 and onward. I was proven wrong, since it actually presents a great crowdfunding opportunity, in which all projects are more or less interdependent and reliant on the success of crypto as a whole. We will see more and more, hopefully legit, icos. We're just getting started, imo.

Skimming through the whitepaper is not enough. I would say the simplest, yet most effective way to assess whether a project has potential or not is through their team. A team with a great deal of experience in the field (checking the validity of their claims, as in who they are what they do is paramount but implied, I think) has the greatest chances to see a project go through the roof.

#Proof of ownership
USERNAME TELEGRAM: @ogedeikhan
ETH ERC20 WALLET: 0x6821b62f2A11B20Fa3697d056844c83658184a8b

#Proof of ownership
USERNAME TELEGRAM: @ogedeikhan
USERNAME TWITTER: @LucIcsel
ETH ERC20 WALLET: 0x6821b62f2A11B20Fa3697d056844c83658184a8b

As the title says. In case the buyer has a trusted reputation, there won't be a need for escrow.

Not necessarily, but it certainly does play a big factor. Maybe not for ethereum, seeing that most of the devs and people behind are quite probably very well off, but it's not the case for new projects. That being said, I don't think anyone can pin an accurate price on cryptos right now. We just have no actual clue on how well integrated into our current socio-economic status-quo they can be. If at all. I'm convinced they will play a huge role in the future, but it could be also that I'm biased given that I'm heavily invested in them.

Crypto is here to stay, I'm convinced based on my own knowledge of market psychology. Now, I'm no economics or market guru, but the resilience this market displays has convinced me through and through. I usually study the whole crypto market cap from a technical standpoint and this is how I try to gauge people's feelings. Wild swings are unnerving and understandable since we're still so early in the game that nobody can put an actual, legitimate price on these assets. I say early because, bar a very tiny amount of exceptions, there are no cryptos with real world applicability. I think 2018-2019 will be the interval in which that situation will greatly change. For the better.

Same way I choose to invest in different projects, since it's my time that I put into it. Team, experience, potential prototype, whitepaper. Factoring all these in, I try to choose the most solid option. Not the amount paid right after the campaign ends, given that a good project can easily jump some time after the ICO. Also, I tend to favor those that use platforms to track your submitted work. It's more professional, I guess.

Same goes for me when it comes to adex. I was invested since the beginning and made decent profits, however I sold all of it when they started delaying the prototype. Lost all my faith in the project, even though the team and the project were more than solid. They're not direct competitors, but my money would be on oyster to actually deliver on something that could solve the ad revenue issues.

I'm liking both the project and the team. What's the deal with Atari though? Some sort of partnership I take it? And I'm also curious as to why you decided to make the coin mineable. Doesn't really fit the theme, I think. Usually a coin whose main purpose is to be a form of a currency is mined.