Earlier quoted context omitted.
There wasn't any Ethereum ICO. Every ETH was mined.
I'm not sure they were calling it an ICO around then, but there was absolutely an online public crowdsale in 2014.
You're correct, my bad.
Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
231–240 of 243 posts
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#232Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sia is more legitimate. I don't own any Siacoin or Filecoin, but I would hold Siacoin if it was supported by the Ledger hardware wallet.
https://sia.tech/funding2016/ ? How is this any different? I realize that this doesn't concern an ICO, but still there is plenty of VC involvement to "taint" the project.
[deleted]
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you're saying that Sequoia Capital, Andreessen Horowitz, Union Square Ventures, and Winklevoss Capital didn't know what they were getting into?
Yeah exactly. Anyone who has engaged with the protocol knows there are huge unknowns - they're acknowledged in the whitepaper. They have theoretical solutions which are often discussed in public on Github and Gitter, and they've gotten past many large hurdles already as a team. I think there's a chance. Importantly, if Filecoin were usable right now to guarantee storage and retrievability of files, I have use cases I…
I'm not understanding how this is categorically different than your standard VC deal.
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In case you're still thinking your iPhone is a crappy computer, No, the iPhone in your pocket is already performant enough to function as a full fledged server. It's the network that doesn't support it. A crappy computer, no; a crappy server , yes. The available network is part of a server. A URL that points to a machine that can't be accessed whenever the owner goes into a tunnel, is a URL nobody will link to. (An…
> A crappy computer, no; a crappy server, yes. The available network is part of a server. A URL that points to a machine that can't be accessed whenever the owner goes into a tunnel, is a URL nobody will link to. This is one of the very points that IPFS tries to address: decoupling content from location, so that additional copies of the same content in different locations of the network can actually strengthen the co…
Works if you're serving a static webpage; doesn't work if you're serving, say, a private chatroom. This is what decentralized execution environments like Ethereum seek to solve, but running an Ethereum node on your phone is not the same thing as actually serving a private chatroom from your phone. In fact, Ethereum is much closer to the cloudlet side of the spectrum of solutions, insofar as your client (the phone) is just sending commands to a computer "somewhere else" (in this case, ~everywhere) that then acts as the server.
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah exactly. Anyone who has engaged with the protocol knows there are huge unknowns - they're acknowledged in the whitepaper. They have theoretical solutions which are often discussed in public on Github and Gitter, and they've gotten past many large hurdles already as a team. I think there's a chance. Importantly, if Filecoin were usable right now to guarantee storage and retrievability of files, I have use cases I…
I'm not understanding how this is categorically different than your standard VC deal.
It's a little different I guess since the public invested too. I think that's a good thing though but I may regret this comment if crypto (specifically Filecoin) goes totally sideways. The public should be allowed to take risks though!
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not understanding how this is categorically different than your standard VC deal.
It's a little different I guess since the public invested too. I think that's a good thing though but I may regret this comment if crypto (specifically Filecoin) goes totally sideways. The public should be allowed to take risks though!
The public did invest under the same rules as a standard VC deal, i.e. Reg D. Though I guess with additional accredited investor verification on account of the general solicitation rules, which don't typically apply in VC deals.
> The public should be allowed to take risks though!
I have complex feelings about this. For example, I wanted to participate in the Filecoin ICO, and I could not because I don't meet the accredited investor requirements. On the micro level, I was a bit disappointed. It's my money, if I want to give it to a charlatan, I should be able to. On the macro level, I understand that it makes sense that most people like me shouldn't be investing in companies that aren't required to make any disclosures, financials or otherwise, particularly when people like me aren't really in a position to negotiate for that information. In my mind, protecting mom and pop is still a worthwhile goal.
So while I definitely agree that the public should be allowed to take risks, it's relevant that there are quite a few markets that they have unimpeded access to. And I'm generally sympathetic to the SEC's desire to shield the least sophisticated investors from the riskiest investments.
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
That also applies to shares, real estate, apples, Teslas, ...
Yes. I was just stating the obvious, which appeared to be not so obvious to the commenter.
Not sure we should bash that comment. If large means 1 million dollars it isn't hard to find liquidity to sell 100BTC.
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A crappy computer, no; a crappy server, yes. The available network is part of a server. A URL that points to a machine that can't be accessed whenever the owner goes into a tunnel, is a URL nobody will link to. This is one of the very points that IPFS tries to address: decoupling content from location, so that additional copies of the same content in different locations of the network can actually strengthen the co…
Works if you're serving a static webpage; doesn't work if you're serving, say, a private chatroom. This is what decentralized execution environments like Ethereum seek to solve, but running an Ethereum node on your phone is not the same thing as actually serving a private chatroom from your phone. In fact, Ethereum is much closer to the cloudlet side of the spectrum of solutions, insofar as your client (the phone) is…
Works with IPFS if you use Pubsub, cryptographic capabilities, and CRDTs :) Check out PeerPad: https://peerpad.net
edit: what I also meant to say is, a chat room doesn't need computation (although there certainly use cases that do)
Re: Is Filecoin a $257 million Ponzi scheme? [pdf]
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's more generally about hosting any content-addressed data. That's much much more than files/directories, as S3/Dropbox/Sia are doing. Files and directories are just one particular data structure you can store on IPFS. Think of it as a global unified content-addressed graph database really, and Filecoin can store any arbitrary (sub)graphs within that.
> No, it's more generally about hosting any content-addressed data. Back to my original points, I don't think it is about hosting the data. It's the location of the data. Eg, a room full of people downloading a large video don't need to leave the room for the majority of the data, they can share the data between each other - seamlessly. Leading to less clogging of the network of data when there's absolutely no need f…
> Back to my original points, I don't think it is about hosting the data. It's the location of the data. Eg, a room full of people downloading a large video don't need to leave the room for the majority of the data, they can share the data between each other - seamlessly. Leading to less clogging of the network of data when there's absolutely no need for us to be downloading from youtube/etc.
You're absolutely right here of course