Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 310 posts

Re: Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

#191

Post by aub3bhat »

Jabanga wrote: post #184
aub3bhat wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also possible that the government may declare some bills invalid (what happened in India with larger bills). Also, government could inflate away your wealth by printing more currency. At end of the day governments control both the network via (ISPs & Networking equipment) and processors (Try producing an 8080 in your backyard.). You make mistake of assuming that countries won't put up a global firewall that make…

Governments are not a conscious entity that is separate from society. They are institutions run by a collection parties with numerous competing and aligning interests, and with extensive stakes in society at large. They're not going to do something as massively destructive to society at large as ban encryption and prohibit all microprocessors lacking a back door.

HN/BitcoinTalk/etc, suffer from extreme (pro-crypto) filter bubble. The average man/woman on the street ("society") could care less about Bitcoin/Ether. Just look at the whole Net Neutrality debate.

Bitcoin/Ether barely register in terms of the total economic activity (75 Billion $). With significant fraction unusable. They will either be tamed or destroyed.

In fact another way of looking at cryptocurrencies is as a revolt against the Visa/MasterCard duo-poly & regulations that has made digital transactions too difficult. The moment digital transactions become cheaper/more-efficient, the allure of crypto-currencies will disappear.

Re: Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

#193

Post by Jabanga »

aub3bhat wrote: post #191
Jabanga wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments are not a conscious entity that is separate from society. They are institutions run by a collection parties with numerous competing and aligning interests, and with extensive stakes in society at large. They're not going to do something as massively destructive to society at large as ban encryption and prohibit all microprocessors lacking a back door.

HN/BitcoinTalk/etc, suffer from extreme (pro-crypto) filter bubble. The average man/woman on the street ("society") could care less about Bitcoin/Ether. Just look at the whole Net Neutrality debate. Bitcoin/Ether barely register in terms of the total economic activity (75 Billion $). With significant fraction unusable. They will either be tamed or destroyed. In fact another way of looking at cryptocurrencies is as a…

It's not Bitcoin/Ether that the average person on the street cares about. It's the collateral damage that will be done if broad categories of technology are banned or have their security completely compromised. That's the only way to stop a purely informational technology.

As for the allure of cryptocurrency, only time will tell. I predict they will continue to grow in prominence.

Re: Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

#194

Post by delazeur »

ericd wrote: post #131
lz400 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if a court makes you liable for some payment and you have eth assets, they will force you to liquidate and pay. They can't confiscate it but if you refuse you go to jail.

Ah, the old encryption vs. monkey wrench scenario. Never forget the monkey wrench.

This is critical: clever math is not going to protect your assets from the organization that has a monopoly on violence.

Re: Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

#195

Post by delazeur »

ebcode wrote: post #159
pikzen wrote: post #143

>the inability to control people. What's horrifying is people thinking like that. We live in societies with rules, with laws that we have agreed upon, and are, for the most part, fair. These same laws and this same governement protects you, gives you at least some basic services. And you're advocating for not holding up your end of the bargain, and removing one big part of the punishment for not holding it up. To peo…

Governments do not protect everyone, or provide basic services to everyone, equally. Also, unless you were there for the revolution, you didn't agree to the laws of the land where you happened to be born. As an anarchist, I don't find my relationship with my government to be one that I would enter into willingly if I were given the freedom not to. Instead, I live under the constant threat of state-sanctioned violence…

> Governments do not protect everyone, or provide basic services to everyone, equally.

That's true, but why is your response is to check out of society rather than to push for constructive changes? Why should I respect your choice to take your ball and go home?

Re: Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

#196

Post by peculiar »

devoply wrote: post #3

> made it easier than ever for entrepreneurs to raise large sums of money without dealing with the hassles of regulators, investor protections or accountants. Umm no easier than raising funds for any other venture, in fact probably more difficult and I would think a lot of that money is coming from people who were already made rich by other coin like bitcoin. Easy come, easy go, but enjoy the gravy train while you ar…

Well, actually US is not the only country in the world. There are places with zero chance to get any VC funding. I have even seen a funny acceleration program that offers $300 (three hundred bucks) for 10% of a startup (and there was a huge list of requirements the company and founders should meet). That's ridiculous. ICOs open a window of opportunities in such places. That's a pity though it is discredited by been used for scams.

Re: Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

#197

Post by tinfoilman »

calafrax wrote: post #189
ransom1538 wrote: post #58

I have a fetish for watching complicated court cases play through. What you realize is a judge in a courtroom has a lot of power. They can take your money, freedom or even kids. However, if I had few hundred thousand in Ethereum encrypted placed into a few random anonymous git hub repros, well, the government can't take it. It is truly yours. No one can take it. That must be horrifying proposition for (some) governme…

Nothing online is anonymous. Everything you do is logged and tracked. Real cash is much more anonymous than stupid blockchains where every single transaction is published globally for all time.

Check out Monero, Tech wise interesting from a privacy point of view.

You are right the web is tracked so even if Monero itself has untraceable transactions, buying Xmr generally requires an exchange which in turn kyc.

Re: Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

#198

Post by Jabanga »

Cakez0r wrote: post #165
realworldview wrote: post #148

So this is like buying food vouchers that I can redeem at a store that hasn't yet been built, if indeed it has been given planning permission and even if it does eventually get built, I have no idea how the service and product will taste. And I can't then report any irregularities. Ponzi? No. Unregulated gambling? Of course. Sign me up!

It's worse than that. In some cases, the coins literally serve no purpose. To use your metaphor, it's like buying StoreBucks for a store that hasn't been built yet, with no promise that you'll be able to redeem your StoreBucks for anything at all. For example, a project called Status ( http://status.im/ ) recently held an ICO in which people were tripping over themselves to buy Status's coins. It actually backed up t…

The explanation of the token's use is right here:

https://status.im/whitepaper.pdf

Re: Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

#199

Post by Jabanga »

the_cat_kittles wrote: post #111
ErikVandeWater wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that were true there would be no economy.

what? original claim: how absurd something is has no bearing on how successful it is. you: this implies there is no economony. me: how?

The economy would be destroyed if people didn't usually engage in economic activity that caused the level of wealth across the economy to increase. It's reasonable to assume absurd actions generally cause a net loss to the economy.

Re: Easiest Path to Riches on the Web? An Initial Coin Offering

#200

Post by ameister14 »

Jabanga wrote: post #180
pikzen wrote: post #143

>the inability to control people. What's horrifying is people thinking like that. We live in societies with rules, with laws that we have agreed upon, and are, for the most part, fair. These same laws and this same governement protects you, gives you at least some basic services. And you're advocating for not holding up your end of the bargain, and removing one big part of the punishment for not holding it up. To peo…

>We live in societies with rules, with laws that we have agreed upon, and are, for the most part, fair. Societies have gradually grown more unfair as the political system has strained under their growing complexity. According to political scientists, the average voter has an extremely limited understanding of what their government is doing. The typical person's understanding of economics is similarly extremely limite…

The average voter has always had an extremely limited understanding of what their government is doing, and demagogues? How old do you think that word is? This is not something new.

I agree that the mass surveillance systems are a problem, but that's mostly because it enables greater control in the future, not because that control is in place today. It's also not unprecedented - the Stasi had a more comprehensive surveillance network than anything in place today.

All that said, I completely agree with the necessity of greater privacy protections.

I don't think you are completely grasping the concept of the 'bargain' you were responding to, though. We voluntarily exchange some individual rights for collective security and prosperity all the time. Basically, you have the right to leave the protection of the State. When you do that, you get all your rights back, but the State has the right to declare war on you. It usually doesn't work out, because you're back in the state of being able to keep and hold whatever you yourself can protect from all comers.

Post reply on HN