F*** ICO's.

[cryptor0th]

This is what people want. ICO after ICO after ICO. Most people are here to try to make a quick buck. They know ICOs are scams and they do not care. Better to make peace with it.

I am completely at peace with it. Just stating, if a revolution is what we're expecting, none of what we're seeing in the ecosystem right now is going to bring it on. Revolutions are a product of the people partaking in them. In most of these cases, they are solely dreams and hopes being sold to a greedy few who then dump it on some others.

[spartacusrex]

OK - so the same conversation - number 1001.

All ICO's are NOT scams, though some may be. (ps I have not bought into any yet, but not because I thought they were scams... I just like reading the white-papers.)

Let's take an example.

HOW could you distribute a coin that does not have a mining structure that supports it ?

HOW could the IOTA tokens have been distributed without an ICO in a sybil attack proof way ? (I know we talked about this yesterday americanpegasus.. but I would like an answer.. ;-) , when IOTA has no concept of 'mining' per se ?

? Thanx.

[cryptor0th]

OK - so the same conversation - number 1001.

All ICO's are NOT scams, though some may be. (ps I have not bought into any yet, but not because I thought they were scams... I just like reading the white-papers.)

Let's take an example.

HOW could you distribute a coin that does not have a mining structure that supports it ?

HOW could the IOTA tokens have been distributed without an ICO in a sybil attack proof way ? (I know we talked about this yesterday americanpegasus.. but I would like an answer.. ;-) , when IOTA has no concept of 'mining' per se ?

? Thanx.

Hello,

On the offset I'd like to state that I am not against any of the coins doing an ICO here. If a community intends to distribute itself on basis of capital invested and come through on it, I believe they have all rights to do so. Individuals have their right to speculate and play with the supply and demand of the industry to make a profit too. None of this is what I have written against.

My key points of concern in the article are

1. Lack of regulations and accountability within the ecosystem
2. The hype that goes on around technology that hasn't been established
3  Tricking innocent investors into buying tokens that are worthless.

If anything decentralized forms of fund raising are a powerful tool to raise capital, empower entrepreneurs and give everyone a chance to benefit from the rapid rise of a start-up but under the current circumstances,

1. A startup can redefine the rules of its commitment within the token system (inflation, not coming through on its promises)
2. Owners of the tokens have almost no legal protection in the event of a bust.
3. Tokens are rarely ever backed by something tangible.

Capital markets around the world are rigged in the same fashion and all am stating is, in this cycle of hype and dump, we've lost something that was meant to be very ideological.

As for distribution issues, in case you don't realize- Bitcoin did establish a very smart implementation. Mining aside, it was the early adopters that benefited the most from its early day distribution. Granted we could debate over aspects like holding for long term profit and the mining part - it still showed us that giving a select number of people in the early days incentives to build the ecosystem does work. I will be writing about why ICO's are good and how we could leverage them in one of my coming posts.

P.s - Would you mind sharing all the white papers ? I am trying to make a compilation of all alt-coin white papers right now.

Regards

[americanpegasus]

OK - so the same conversation - number 1001.

All ICO's are NOT scams, though some may be. (ps I have not bought into any yet, but not because I thought they were scams... I just like reading the white-papers.)

Let's take an example.

HOW could you distribute a coin that does not have a mining structure that supports it ?

HOW could the IOTA tokens have been distributed without an ICO in a sybil attack proof way ? (I know we talked about this yesterday americanpegasus.. but I would like an answer.. ;-) , when IOTA has no concept of 'mining' per se ?

? Thanx.

There are many ways.  I'm not even very smart and the first idea that occured to me is create a well-publicized proof-of-work token and let everyone know that at the end of a 3 month - 1 year period their proof-of-work tokens would be permanently exchangeable for IOTA.  This isn't perfect, but its better than a blatant ICO. 

[spartacusrex]

There are many ways.  I'm not even very smart..

You're no fool.. 

..and the first idea that occured to me is create a well-publicized proof-of-work token and let everyone know that at the end of a 3 month - 1 year period their proof-of-work tokens would be permanently exchangeable for IOTA.  This isn't perfect, but its better than a blatant ICO. 

I like this idea, nice and clean, but I think that it is just as unfair as an ICO.

First - the POW is totally useless with regard to your coin's security (let's say IOTA). Just wasted cpu cycles.. If it were used to secure the network that at least would be something.

Then -  doesn't this penalise those who don't have access to a computer 24/7 ?

And finally - Those with faster computers / graphics cards would get more. Again, I see no reason for this being better than just asking for BTC.

..

It certainly 'sounds' fairer but I think you would end up with just as lop-sided a distribution..  Maybe more so as less people would understand it. An ICO is pretty straight forward.

.. BUT - you know what - it may have a future if this removes any legal complications that arise from an ICO.

Not bad for your 'first' idea..
 

[squall1066]

I have been saying this for years lol, my squall coin is a non ico/ipo coin, I have funded everything myself, I have no ones money!!

"how will giving money to devs make you rich" is my quote, and I stand by it.

This might sound like a plug, but I am more interested in saving people money, I was a big coin pumper/dumper back in the good old days, only to loose ALOT along with many other people.

It's just not worth it, just my opinion tho, if your good you can cream off a few coins before they disappear, but my coin is two years in and still being traded!. think on that.

[BellaBitBit]

Among the scams there is important innovation occurring.  We are witnessing a new way of funding projects and promoting innovation - crowdsourcing.  Crypto is at the front of the decentralization movement which is going to influence technology in the future.

[cryptor0th]

I really don't understand why people think crowd-sourcing is where the "innovation" is. People have been crowd-sourcing and offering shares in potential profit for hundreds of centuries. To put it in perspective, the British Conquest of India was partly "crowd-sourced" in the sense that East India Company had a number of private investors. You could say wars were also crowd-sourced in the sense that bonds issued to fund these wars in the 17th century were bought by private investors. None of this is what's "innovative"

The primary innovation in the ecosystem was what Satoshi offered when he made a system that allowed all of us to remove the barriers set by conventional banking and fiat system . A lot of these "investments" are being made because you have an anonymous system of value transfer that happens digitally. Granted a lot of the new coins (especially IOTA ) are solving drastically new problems, what am trying to talk of is the pointless hype around them.

[enet]

The world is full of noise and cycles. This was no different when the first Italian city states develop the foundations of modern commerce, Europeans started colonising the new World, the Industrial revolution in England brought forth the steam engine and capitalist production, Railroads, Electricity, the Internet, etc. It is best to focus on specific things one knows how to improve and run with it, rather than worrying about all the things one can not fix. Capital on the blockchain is a pretty interesting and valuable mechanism, just still very raw.

[cryptor0th]

The world is full of noise and cycles. This was no different when the first Italian city states develop the foundations of modern commerce, Europeans started colonising the new World, the Industrial revolution in England brought forth the steam engine and capitalist production, Railroads, Electricity, the Internet, etc. It is best to focus on specific things one knows how to improve and run with it, rather than worrying about all the things one can not fix. Capital on the blockchain is a pretty interesting and valuable mechanism, just still very raw.

Pretty much summed up what I think of things.
The brightest minds in the world are yet to tap on the industry in a major way. Fintech's smartest people are yet to enter and disrupt.
What we have right now are a lot of scum like beings utilizing a technology built with the highest of ideals to trick and steal.
Additionally all the bad news keeps people wary about even working in the sector.
Things are changing slowly though.

[Bit_Happy]

...top notch software development requires funding. We all need money to live.

Top notch software development requires funding
^^^
Did anyone actually answer this, or are you all just enjoying a one-sided circle-jerk?
How do great new projects get funded if the innovators are not allowed to be paid?

[ICOcountdown.com]

You are upsetting me  

It is a better way of mining though ease of access is higher.

[cryptor0th]

...top notch software development requires funding. We all need money to live.

Top notch software development requires funding
^^^
Did anyone actually answer this, or are you all just enjoying a one-sided circle-jerk?
How do great new projects get funded if the innovators are not allowed to be paid?

Hey

I apologize for not responding to this earlier. Skipped my mind (although I don't see where it is posted).

Yes, innovators need to be paid for the work they do and in that sense, ICO's are indeed a powerful medium of capital mobility.
However,

1. How do you validate these "innovators" ?
2. How do you ensure they continue working post fund-raising (multi-sigs are a possibility, but its rarely used)
3. On what pay-scale are they going to be rewarded ? (Real start-up CEO's avoid salaries to hold company share / liquidate shares for personal expenses )
4. How is their work going to be tracked ? (Yes, Github is one of the possibilities)
5. How are their quality standards tracked ?


Perhaps a better way to put this thread across would have been " ICO's need fixing"
In their current form, they have a lot of flaws and that is perfectly fine. We started at barter and now we are at decentralized global currency.
Systems and financial models evolve over time. However, it is important we detect their flaws, acknowledge them and work towards fixing it.

Thank you for your interest in the thread.

[Bit_Happy]

...top notch software development requires funding. We all need money to live.

Top notch software development requires funding
^^^
Did anyone actually answer this, or are you all just enjoying a one-sided circle-jerk?
How do great new projects get funded if the innovators are not allowed to be paid?

Hey

I apologize for not responding to this earlier. Skipped my mind (although I don't see where it is posted).

Yes, innovators need to be paid for the work they do and in that sense, ICO's are indeed a powerful medium of capital mobility.
However,

1. How do you validate these "innovators" ?
2. How do you ensure they continue working post fund-raising (multi-sigs are a possibility, but its rarely used)
3. On what pay-scale are they going to be rewarded ? (Real start-up CEO's avoid salaries to hold company share / liquidate shares for personal expenses )
4. How is their work going to be tracked ? (Yes, Github is one of the possibilities)
5. How are their quality standards tracked ?


Perhaps a better way to put this thread across would have been " ICO's need fixing"
In their current form, they have a lot of flaws and that is perfectly fine. We started at barter and now we are at decentralized global currency.
Systems and financial models evolve over time. However, it is important we detect their flaws, acknowledge them and work towards fixing it.

Thank you for your interest in the thread.

Thanks for your quality response:
1. How do you validate these "innovators" ?
In a free market, investors in profitable companies get rewarded and "suckers" lose their money.

2 - 5) Are we talking about "real-world" companies, 'token-based' crypto 2.0-crap, or truly nasty copy/paste coins?
Seriously, this "Brave New World" needs a way to reward quality founders without automatically calling them a scam... 
That is my only point, thanks.

[cryptor0th]

...top notch software development requires funding. We all need money to live.

Top notch software development requires funding
^^^
Did anyone actually answer this, or are you all just enjoying a one-sided circle-jerk?
How do great new projects get funded if the innovators are not allowed to be paid?

Hey

I apologize for not responding to this earlier. Skipped my mind (although I don't see where it is posted).

Yes, innovators need to be paid for the work they do and in that sense, ICO's are indeed a powerful medium of capital mobility.
However,

1. How do you validate these "innovators" ?
2. How do you ensure they continue working post fund-raising (multi-sigs are a possibility, but its rarely used)
3. On what pay-scale are they going to be rewarded ? (Real start-up CEO's avoid salaries to hold company share / liquidate shares for personal expenses )
4. How is their work going to be tracked ? (Yes, Github is one of the possibilities)
5. How are their quality standards tracked ?


Perhaps a better way to put this thread across would have been " ICO's need fixing"
In their current form, they have a lot of flaws and that is perfectly fine. We started at barter and now we are at decentralized global currency.
Systems and financial models evolve over time. However, it is important we detect their flaws, acknowledge them and work towards fixing it.

Thank you for your interest in the thread.

Thanks for your quality response:
1. How do you validate these "innovators" ?
In a free market, investors in profitable companies get rewarded and "suckers" lose their money.

2 - 5) Are we talking about "real-world" companies, 'token-based' crypto 2.0-crap, or truly nasty copy/paste coins?
Seriously, this "Brave New World" needs a way to reward quality founders without automatically calling them a scam... 
That is my only point, thanks.

1. In a free market, doesn't the capitalist also have the right to verify the validity of the human resource he's investing into.
I see your POV though - basically, those who invest into the right people and go the extra length of seeing who's worth it get rewarded.

2. I concur with your point there. I think I need to explain why ICO's can be a force for good. I'll follow up this post with a new thread in a bit from now that talks about the good of ICO's

[Spoetnik]

...top notch software development requires funding. We all need money to live.

Top notch software development requires funding
^^^
Did anyone actually answer this, or are you all just enjoying a one-sided circle-jerk?
How do great new projects get funded if the innovators are not allowed to be paid?

Do you realize that history is FULL of quality free code ?
Requires payment ? Nope.. wrong.

Want an example ?
Google "Rockbox Firmware" and check out some of the contributed content that is CC'd

Need a million dollars to make OPEN SOURCE FREE CODE ON GITHUB ?

AHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA

Now i turn to your other point..

Innovation ? Uhh where ?
Do you know what innovation means ?

Show me one single innovation over Bitcoin.
You can't
I have said this 100 times and no one ever has.

I do enjoy a one-sided circle-jerk    

innovation.. ahahah that was funny !

[Spoetnik]

You are upsetting me  

It is a better way of mining though ease of access is higher.

Scenario 1):
A user can go to Bitcointalk and download the Litecoin wallet and run it.. getting coins.

Scenario 2):
A user can go to their local bank branch and withdraw $100 then stand there wondering how to get it onto Poloniex to buy some ICO tokens then have to figure out how to get Bitcoin then figure out that there *ARE* exchanges and that they *NEED* to sign up at one and hand over their picture-id (as requested) in order to transfer Bitcoin over there so they can then play the markets with greedy wolves and deceitful hyped / spammy dishonest chatbox users where they can then buy ICO scheme tokens.

Only question after scenario 2 is WHY would the public want to do that and then WHAT would they even do with them once they withdraw them from Poloniex and get their picture ID info back

Can i ask.. why are you lying ? Financial agenda ?

PS:
Nice account name  

[cryptor0th]

You are upsetting me  

It is a better way of mining though ease of access is higher.

Scenario 1):
A user can go to Bitcointalk and download the Litecoin wallet and run it.. getting coins.

Scenario 2):
A user can go the local bank branch and withdraw $100 then stand there wondering how to get it onto Poloniex to buy some ICO tokens then have to figure out how to get Bitcoin then figure out that there *ARE* exchanges and that they *NEED* to sign up at one and hand over their picture-id (as requested) in order to transfer Bitcoin over there so they can then play the markets with greedy wolves and deceitful hyped / spammy dishonest chatbox users where they can then buy ICO scheme tokens.

Only question after scenario 2 is WHY would the public want to do that and then WHAT would they even do with them once they withdraw them from Poloniex and get their picture ID info back

Can i ask.. why are you lying ? Financial agenda ?

PS:
Nice account name  

I've been following you for a while. Very ideological posts
I've written a counter-argument in regards to why ICO's could be good in another thread. Please do take a look.
I do not intend to bash upon any economic system but solely point out the good and the bad that is on-going in the community at the moment.

Also, is this the rockbox you were talking of ?
http://www.rockbox.org

[Spoetnik]

I'll check it out.. and yea that was the site.

We ALL know there is a LOT of code out there that is built up into HUGE systems.. for free.
If you can't *afford* to code then leave it to someone who can.

I have written plenty last couple decades and never charged a cent or taken donations
Except in 1 scenario..
I was working on an optimized Quark Coin miner
And i charged users a min donation fee of what ever coins where on Cryptsy to get it.
But we're talking a conversion of what ever shit-coins valued at $10 per person basically.
Not 250k or a million $$$

Why ?
I still have my PM's from Mullick saying i was banned from posting links to my miner (for a day or two)
on the Cryptsy chat-box.. apparently someone told them i was posting a miner with a virus.
All miners get flagged by VirusTotal etc though LOL

I was posting new build versions freely on Cryptsy chat and one guy came back and flipped out
all pissed off because he installed the miner on a pile of servers (a botnet of some type)
He got mad because i broke the code so it was not mining properly..
Which caused a bunch of us to loose mining earnings for about a day or so.
I told him that is why i did not want to post any links anywhere..
BECAUSE IT WAS A BETA TEST !
As i said Nooooon stop.

I also told them all i kept getting bitched at when i mentioned it briefly or my main tester guy
gave me feedback on chat briefly.. sometimes i made the miner worse and others a bit better.
It was more about some experimentation than anything.

SO..
When i got the link ban and that botnet guy was mad at me etc
I said well fuck this i will tack on some code i wrote..

I went and coded in a protection system so you needed a Serial / key to run it (with beta options available)
Or.. with no key it would run as the stable version i made which worked great with all features like colors in console etc
So.. i was charging for the entry to be a beta tester mainly. (to enable extra experimental mode)
It would still run great with out paying a cent !
Yet i was swiftly told here on the forum i was running a cheating miner and charging money for it LOL
When another guy was doing that here and his did not run with out paying at all !
(his was GPU and mine was CPU)

I tried to stress i had a dedicated buddy doing testing for me and providing feedback
and he was the only one doing that.. everyone else just wanted more coins
and gave me no feedback on it (which was the whole entire point i was sharing my work)

My tester guy had a few CPU's i did not have to help test with etc
So my charging money for code once in all of my time in crypto was
simply my way of keeping the user count down so i did not get flooded with request etc.
And to hopefully get testers that would give me feedback.
Which caused issues with testing results from more users.
Then i had guys sending me piles of emails saying they were all getting different results etc
When they would not follow the directions i gave them to record a proper benchmark.
(I had coded in a variety of benchmark modes & options)

I also should point out i had spent a lot of time telling noobs what a miner is and how to use it..
When all i wanted to do was write fucking code !
Once i let the cat of the bag it snow balled into a pain in the ass.
Eventually in time interest waned on all our parts and we all moved on..
/The End

I am probably the only guy who ever did that 

I was surprised that no cracker did not load it in OllyDBG patch 1 jump and share it publicly..
Would have been easy.. i could have cracked it in under 60 seconds guaranteed 

PS:
@OP
I think you are a lot like Shelby
Coincidentally the same long comments and "Ideological" views on ICO's etc

[partysaurus]

We stand at a weird point of time in the history of Blockchain technology and its eventual rise to mainstream adoption. The technology is not a geeks dream anymore and the community is not entirely considered to be outliers. Banks, governments, enterprises and private investors are watching with eyes open on the various projects that emerge from enthusiasts of a revolution that is expected to be decentralized in nature. Amidst the hype and excitement, DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization) has managed to raise over 150 million dollars. . The fact that this amount has been raised from individuals around the globe, most of whose identities are not even known shows the potential a decentralized currency has in the context of fund raising. While the legalities, logic and possibilities of what is happening is subject to debate, this post is not about that. It is about how development on the Blockchain has evolved over the years.


When Satoshi Nakamoto released the whitepaper for Bitcoin in 2008, he did not seek a couple million dollars in funding. What he did however, was seek the input, insight and contribution of skilled individuals from around the globe that he believed could contribute to the project. The rise of Bitcoin was not through pointless hype but rather by building upon its utility and community over the years. From the perspective of a consumer — Bitcoin does one job and it does it perfectly well. Remit tokens of value, around the globe, while circumventing global players such as banks, governments and their related agencies. Granted the currency or rather commodity is subject to fluctuations owing to supply and demand, the currency paved way for millions of individuals to connect themselves to an economy they never had access to earlier. Entrepreneurs and freelancers from third world economies could now receive and remit payments while not losing a major chunk of it to third parties who never played a role in adding value to the economic chain. Bitcoin garnered traction, not because it could raise a couple million dollars through an initial coin offering, but rather because it could get its job done right amongst the demographic that used it during the initial days, regardless of whether they were hackers, money launderers, gamblers or wikileaks.


Skip through to the era of alt-coins and you have a community of developers sprouting from around the globe demanding thousands of Bitcoin in “investments” or rather, donations for the purpose of building blockchain based solutions. The fact that a large chunk of these developers remain largely anonymous and are often not accountable in regards to how the funds are spent leads to disastrous situations in regards to corporate governance and transparency. Ethereum — which was once one of the largest crowd-fund amongst decentralized communities, was crippled for a while due to fund shortages and mismanagement of its funds. Similarly, Bitshares — a community that decided to have its tokens given to developers on the basis of voting and democracy found itself crippled owing to politics and investors not understanding how to actually build a profitable enterprise.


Waves, Lisk and IOTA have together raised over 5 million dollars in the last few months. Each of these currencies solve unique problems and definitely contribute drastically to how the world approaches a more decentralized era. Odds are, the teams behind them are fairly credible too. However what’s concerning me as an individual is the amount of hype that’s going on behind these coins and the culture of pointless ICO’s around a number of concepts that add little or no value to the ecosystem. The sheer amount of dead ICO’s and projects that have fizzled out would easily run into the tens of millions of dollars. There used to be a time when this wasn’t the nature of decentralized currency. When core utility and a community around the product mattered more than the funds raised. When the end goal was disruption rather than a short term hike in price. It almost feels like in trying to disrupt conventional systems of banking, we have the community itself falling down to greed and short term obsession towards a pump.


This obsession towards ICO’s and investment gimmicks can possibly do more harm than good because in a lot of these cases the capital is dumb capital and does not pave way for the innovators (if any) behind the coin to actually have the opportunity to work on the coin and the product behind it. Unlike venture capitalists who take risks posts conducting due diligences, Bitcointalk is strife with individuals who don’t have a clue in regards to what’s’ going on. Seasoned investors in the game would easily play the pump and dump game while an individual that is new to the ecosystem would play along, eventually losing out what’s his or hers. While the free market does give each individual the freedom to do whatever he prefers to do with his money and investors are bound to lose their money if they don’t do their due diligences, I personally believe all this obsession with ICO’s could partly be the reason why no alt currency has neither attained the scale nor the user base Bitcoin has in all these years.


Revolutions are not to be monetized. Or, in the few cases they were , they did not really end with the masses being on the side not being screwed over. (eg : Rothschilds and the battle of Waterloo). While private investments and interests in Blockchain technology is rather welcome and much needed, the pump and dump game looks like a new iteration of penny stocks for individuals to sit on their computers all day long and earn money for spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt). I am a strong believer in decentralized crowdfunding and what it can do for the people. What am against however (and this post in its entirety is about) -is the pointless hype that goes on behind some of these projects. Its time the community called the bullshit once and for all. A lot of the “enthusiasts” behind the new ICO’s do so with the intent of liquidating at a higher profit margin within a matter of months, if not weeks and thereby increasing their capital. If such, is the nature of capitalism within our attempts to create a revolution on the blockchain, may god bless our souls. Or much rather, may the banks come do it through their “permissioned” ledgers, because I fail to see the differency any longer. Both .. are fuelled by speculation, greed and a deep control on the monetary policies



Tl:Dr : Such ICO, MUCH WOW!!

super good post! big wall of text, but i read through it and it was worth it