why is it important to look at the community of an ICO before investing in their coin?
It is important, because you can have the best project in the world, but if there is little community support - you will have a tough time getting the network effect to work for you. That being said, most projects start with small communities, which normally grow over time. I've discovered many good projects with small, but growing communities. Another benefit of larger communities is that it normally ensures more liquidity - something that is good in terms of price discovery, etc. |
|
|
|
Recently, i knew about the Lawsuit of the Bitcoin.com issue, so i really want to know about Does the lawsuit of Bitcoin.com affect Bitcoin prices?  I don't believe it is affecting Bitcoin prices - and if it does, it won't be good for BTC. I have heard on good account that the lawsuit enjoys very little support and that beyond name calling, they have little to fall back on. P.S. Roger Ver responded to the haters yesterday: https://youtu.be/quJctIjKoi0 |
|
|
|
It is happening right now: Mark Zuckerberg is being asked by the Senate about the Facebook personal data issue.
Well, to me this is a historical event, where many stuff of matter is being discussed:
- The privacy of Facebook. When you open your Facebook account, there are several rules (nobody reads them, apparently) where it is specified that all the data you provide will be immediately belonging to Facebook. Even when you delete your account they still store some of your data, but to what end?
- The Facebook mobile app also asks you about having access to your phone data (contacts, ok, but also your personal call history). This is being discussed as I write these lines for, What's the point of doing so?
- The Cambridge Analytica scandal just has thrown some light upon the Facebook's lack of confidentiality. But the discuss having place right now is going much further. How can Facebook team accept the legal conditions of the Alexander Kogan's quiz, even when it was clearly breaking the Facebook "law"?
Mark Zuckerberg is clearly having a bad time in trying to persuade the Senators of the goodwill of his enterprise. But, to me, it goes really far, and I have many many questions:
- Is an enterprise as Facebook responsible for the content people publish on the platform? If I have a private message app, then can I be responsible for what kind of messenger the people sent to each other?
- Is the free of expression more important than the harm it can provoke? For instance, look at how many teenagers have committed suicide due to the cyberbullying they receive from other users. There is some kind of response from the developers?
- If anyone is making rich by convincing people to share their personal data, can it be fraudulent in any sense?
Some previous thoughts:
- People do not read anymore. They just share whatever they want in order to get some recognition from the people surrounding. The "like" system is certainly sick, but the users and abusers of it are just as much sick as the concept itself. The people is not concerned about their own privacy or even their closed people one. So... Is it a company trouble or a social one?
- If I share anything on the internet, for sure it can be used in many ways. It is how the internet works. So, is the problem about Facebook, or this is just the tip of the iceberg and just shows how little society is prepared for this kind of platforms.
I don't use Facebook. I despise all related to the platform, but, in many ways, I believe this is a historical event. One of the biggest American entrepreneurs is on a trial for "selling data".
What do you think? I personally believe it can be a great debate about the use of the internet and the collect of data.
Nevertheless, It seems kind of ironic the US government is so against Facebook now, even when they ask you to show your social media app when you trespass their boards...
And also, all the senators questioning Zuckerbergs' platform use Facebook to their campaigns...
In my analysis facebook is nothing short of a front for Intelligence - and has been for years. I don't for one minute believe that Zuckerberg had a hard time before the Senate panel. It is just for show. Follow the money to see why I deem this to be the case. The mass collection, storage and use of private data for nefarious purposes have been with us for a long time - even outside of facebook. What they value most is the ability to manipulate public opinion. Beyond this purpose, the data of most people are pretty useless to them. This is why most people who have made use of facebook prior to the hearing are still making use of facebook. They have been brainwashed not to care. It is like with cryptos. I am a strong advocate of decentralized, private tokens and token exchanges while it is something that are not important to others at all. They simply don't care. And yet, the direction in which we travel can have huge impact in terms of the destination we reach at the end of the day. The problem is that FB pretty much caters, their main users are more of the vapid teenager types that really just care about presenting a happening image. When such a large portion of your user base is like this, the last thing they're going to even spend a second thinking off is anything serious in the news. They never have, so would not even know what using their data entails. Not that it makes a difference, but it is claimed that facebook has become the social media platform for old people. In any case, while most probably don't care how their data are used, the data is certainly used to for one push public opinion in a certain direction. Teenager type is the wrong word to cover everyone. The more accurate one are people who don't really have a care in the world outside their daily problems. Well, there are many different types of people. Exactly my point. |
|
|
|
It is happening right now: Mark Zuckerberg is being asked by the Senate about the Facebook personal data issue.
Well, to me this is a historical event, where many stuff of matter is being discussed:
- The privacy of Facebook. When you open your Facebook account, there are several rules (nobody reads them, apparently) where it is specified that all the data you provide will be immediately belonging to Facebook. Even when you delete your account they still store some of your data, but to what end?
- The Facebook mobile app also asks you about having access to your phone data (contacts, ok, but also your personal call history). This is being discussed as I write these lines for, What's the point of doing so?
- The Cambridge Analytica scandal just has thrown some light upon the Facebook's lack of confidentiality. But the discuss having place right now is going much further. How can Facebook team accept the legal conditions of the Alexander Kogan's quiz, even when it was clearly breaking the Facebook "law"?
Mark Zuckerberg is clearly having a bad time in trying to persuade the Senators of the goodwill of his enterprise. But, to me, it goes really far, and I have many many questions:
- Is an enterprise as Facebook responsible for the content people publish on the platform? If I have a private message app, then can I be responsible for what kind of messenger the people sent to each other?
- Is the free of expression more important than the harm it can provoke? For instance, look at how many teenagers have committed suicide due to the cyberbullying they receive from other users. There is some kind of response from the developers?
- If anyone is making rich by convincing people to share their personal data, can it be fraudulent in any sense?
Some previous thoughts:
- People do not read anymore. They just share whatever they want in order to get some recognition from the people surrounding. The "like" system is certainly sick, but the users and abusers of it are just as much sick as the concept itself. The people is not concerned about their own privacy or even their closed people one. So... Is it a company trouble or a social one?
- If I share anything on the internet, for sure it can be used in many ways. It is how the internet works. So, is the problem about Facebook, or this is just the tip of the iceberg and just shows how little society is prepared for this kind of platforms.
I don't use Facebook. I despise all related to the platform, but, in many ways, I believe this is a historical event. One of the biggest American entrepreneurs is on a trial for "selling data".
What do you think? I personally believe it can be a great debate about the use of the internet and the collect of data.
Nevertheless, It seems kind of ironic the US government is so against Facebook now, even when they ask you to show your social media app when you trespass their boards...
And also, all the senators questioning Zuckerbergs' platform use Facebook to their campaigns...
In my analysis facebook is nothing short of a front for Intelligence - and has been for years. I don't for one minute believe that Zuckerberg had a hard time before the Senate panel. It is just for show. Follow the money to see why I deem this to be the case. The mass collection, storage and use of private data for nefarious purposes have been with us for a long time - even outside of facebook. What they value most is the ability to manipulate public opinion. Beyond this purpose, the data of most people are pretty useless to them. This is why most people who have made use of facebook prior to the hearing are still making use of facebook. They have been brainwashed not to care. It is like with cryptos. I am a strong advocate of decentralized, private tokens and token exchanges while it is something that are not important to others at all. They simply don't care. And yet, the direction in which we travel can have huge impact in terms of the destination we reach at the end of the day. The problem is that FB pretty much caters, their main users are more of the vapid teenager types that really just care about presenting a happening image. When such a large portion of your user base is like this, the last thing they're going to even spend a second thinking off is anything serious in the news. They never have, so would not even know what using their data entails. Not that it makes a difference, but it is claimed that facebook has become the social media platform for old people. In any case, while most probably don't care how their data are used, the data is certainly used to for one push public opinion in a certain direction. |
|
|
|
Hello everybody,
I'd like to share my personal experience in this forum and mainly in bounty participation. Hope more experienced members will join and also advise new people in this forum how to act in different situations.
Being a new member everybody wants to try all possible bounties where Newbies could participate...So I signed-up in different bounties. I was trying to follow all the subscription rules, giving all information etc, but I missed one very important thing: I gave wrong URL profile link in most of them. When i figured it out, I was really angry on myself trying to decide what to do, because all my many hours of work for several weeks was up in the air. I decided to ask bounty managers to update my incorrect URL and in all cases it was done. The main recommendation is similar situations is politeness and honesty. Of course your request could be rejected, but taking into account my personal experience polite request with real explanation of the problem solved the issue.
We all need to understand that managers have huge amount of work and they all sick and tired of answering the same questions, replying to stupid questions, updating spreadsheets because somebody like me did a stupid mistake. When I read Telegram and see people asking in some rude way to solve their problem and expecting that it would be solved It makes me angry as well. Therefore if you want your problem solved ask in polite way and try not to push to solve or to give an answer immediately. Put yourself at the place of manager and then you will understand how to ask questions and hot to chat in general.
I'm sure that is not the last mistake I did, so let's share our mistakes in order others learn from them.
I agree with you. Honesty and politeness pay. That being said... "When I read Telegram and see people asking in some rude way to solve their problem and expecting that it would be solved It makes me angry as well. Therefore if you want your problem solved ask in polite way and try not to push to solve or to give an answer immediately" - This normally happens after all other alternatives have failed, including being honest and polite. |
|
|
|
I always notice some members in this forum always asking on how you will tell if the Campaign is a scam so i wrote some things you need to check before entering some campaign
First the idea of the project
If the project is called upon to solve some real problem and has no analogues yet, then it is worth attention.
If the problem is "imaginable", then boldly pass by.
Second Duration of the bounty campaign.
The longer the bounty lasts - the greater the chances that, at the end of it, you will lose a lot of time without receiving any profit, which could be insulting after 2-3 months of work. Also a bad sign when the end of campaign is constantly postpones.
Third Duration Soft-cap
Why is this factor so important? If the project does not collect this soft-cap, which is nothing less than the minimum required amount for the implementation to the project - you will get hole from donuts . You can track of the official web-site how many company has already collected.
Fourth Duration Website quality
If the site is poorly made, many bugs in the interface, poor graphics, then either it is made for illusion, or team has not normal programmers. Both options, of course, are not a good sign.
Happy Hunt.
What you mention is in my opinion not automatic signs of a scam. It is also not solid criteria that can be used to claim that all such campaigns are bad. E.g. failure to get to the soft cap might be the direct result of a failure to effectively market a relevant project. Nothing more. There could still be enough room to push it passed the soft cap. It is better to look into the background of the bounty manager. Look at whether previous campaigns a relevant bounty manager managed - ended successfully without problems. If not, avoid. If the bounty manager has a good track record, the next thing you want to do is to look if the project you're tasked to help promote is solid. Continue from there. |
|
|
|
Hi everyone!
I had been contemplating on investing in crypto coins other than btc, eth and kcs but the lack of better judgment on what coins to pick always hold me back.
I guess self-learning isn't working well for me so today I am humbly asking for your professional advices on how I can choose the best coin from any given market.
I had read somewhere that when the market is red it's a good time to buy and if it's green, it's a good time to sell. But this is usually where I get stuck. I don't know where to go from here.
Please help me. Thank you in advance for any assistance you guys will give me. God bless you all! ♥
If you're not sure which ones to choose, I highly recommend you consider a stake in a fund that will give you access to the top 30 (or so). You might also want a stake in a fund that actively profits from volatility and has good risk management practices in place. |
|
|
|
A lot is going on regarding the regulation of cryptocurrency. Consequenly, a lot of questions are bugling the minds of crypto lovers and even new adopters.
1. What does regulation mean for cryptocurrency?
2.Do you think this will have positive or negative impact on the cryptocurrency world?
3. With regulation, will the aim of the founders of Bitcoin be defeated?
Give your take on this issue as a way of encouraging people who are still skeptical about cryptocurrency.
Bitcoin was born to protect people against governments and bankers. Regulations = control by governments and bankers. It should not be welcomed in this space. |
|
|
|
BitCoin Cash has made very good progress on its digital currency platform and has increased its value. The bitcoin is the highest value coin. bitcoin cash can not be as big as bitcoin right now. Maybe there is a chance in the future.
In addition, we should ask ourselves if Segwit and LN will ever be Bitcoin in substance - and the answer is a definitive: "No." It should not be called Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
I don't think or see any way that could ever happen, bitcoin cash is a fork of bitcoin. Bitcoin is more widely accepted by different people, institutions etc and I don't know how many people that know about bitcoin cash. so I don't see that happening in
As I've previously managed: "Keep in mind that both Bitcoin Cash and Segwit are forks of the original Bitcoin blockchain. The first has done it to be able to scale by using the Bitcoin system - as intended by Satoshi (see below) - while the latter has done it to for one do away with signature data in Bitcoin transactions and to enable it to scale off the Bitcoin system and off-chain by making use of what's called the Lightning Network (LN).""It never really hits a scale ceiling" - Satoshi (Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=149668.msg1596879#msg1596879) |
|
|
|
I don't think so. Bitcoin cash is just a bifurcation of Bitcoin. You may think that it is developing very well and has great development prospects, but you have to know that if Bitcoin's cash grows well, Bitcoin will The development is better.
The only problem is that Segwit is not Bitcoin in substance. So what you mention in terms of the "bifurcation of Bitcoin" and the rest only apply to some extent when it comes to a comparison to Segwit. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin price is going down day by day..
Is bitcoin cash have that much potential to overcome the bitcoin?
Bitcoin cash does not really have the support of the community and with good reason many saw that as an attempt to destroy bitcoin or at least to make it a lot weaker not only that those that forked bitcoin and created bitcoin cash did so in order to obtain a lot of money, and they did but the community did not benefited because of it. The community that supports Bitcoin Cash is already large and growing. More and more people are joining as they learn the truth about Segwit and LN. In addition, as I've previously managed: "Keep in mind that both Bitcoin Cash and Segwit are forks of the original Bitcoin blockchain. The first has done it to be able to scale by using the Bitcoin system - as intended by Satoshi (see below) - while the latter has done it to for one do away with signature data in Bitcoin transactions and to enable it to scale off the Bitcoin system and off-chain by making use of what's called the Lightning Network (LN)."Furthermore, you claim that "those that forked bitcoin and created bitcoin cash did so in order to obtain a lot of money, and they did but the community did not benefited because of it" - On the back of what do you claim that the community didn't benefit? Please explain. E.g. everybody who held BTC received a corresponding quantity in BCH when BCH was created. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
