Live data from Hacker News

Half of ICOs Die Within Four Months After Token Sales Finalized

bloomberg.com

201–210 of 433 posts

Re: Half of ICOs Die Within Four Months After Token Sales Finalized

#201
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> End financial services users repeatedly choose convenience and risk guarantees over self-management. This isn't something which can be papered over with a saucy UI, particularly when the tangible benefit is difficult to describe. ("Decentralization" isn't a benefit, it's an attribute.) Totally agree. In a hypothetical crypto dominated world, most people would still use centralized services to store their money. But…

> In a hypothetical crypto dominated world, most people would still use centralized services to store their money. But they'd have the ability to opt out if and when they choose The problem with this vision is those people using centralized services see no benefit. They are better off sticking with the status quo . Cryptocurrencies make sense for people who wish, for philosophically reasons, to control their own mone…

> The problem with this vision is those people using centralized services see no benefit. They are better off sticking with the status quo.

Narrowly, yes, that's true. But I think there's a broader context to consider than that. Our current financial system is architected around these financial centers of gravity. Blockchains represent an alternative to that structure. Yes, there will still be intermediary institutions, but they will not have the same fundamental centrality that the current ones do. I think this is an important change, and one that is likely to lead to other changes that will be more directly appreciated by consumers and the broader economy than the philosophical self-sovereign money issues.

Re: Half of ICOs Die Within Four Months After Token Sales Finalized

#203
post #116
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's weird because people compare it to the early days of the Internet... but the early Internet was useful from its beginning That really depends on where you put 'beginning'. But more to the point, blockchains are useful now, just like the internet was. They're just not useful for all the things that are being promised (yet). Also, just like the internet wasn't. > Now, all we see is rampant fraud and a complete d…

1. What if we put "beginning" as in "before it was even called the Internet"? Indeed, ARPANET, which came online in 1969, saw fast growth in the United States in the 70s. Nodes came online to use it , not to make a quick buck. The government subsidized it because its potential use was obvious. Email started being used in 1972, FTP in 1973. To compare these world-changing technologies that were invented and used merel…

I would definitely argue that blockchain is closer to the arpanet days than it is to the world wide web days.

This stuff is so early. A lot of the really enabling infrastructure doesn't exist, and won't exist for years. Most builders have no idea what the true strengths and limitations are. It'll get there, but it's not a 2020 type of get there. Maybe 2025.

Re: Half of ICOs Die Within Four Months After Token Sales Finalized

#204
post #198
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main use case for block chains is quite obviously to skirt government regulation: black markets, unregulated securities and quasi-securities, etc. A secondary and related use case is to avoid the hassle and complexity of old fashioned equity and other fund raising constructs and to make easier international wire transfers. Putting ethical concerns aside: these are very large market segments. Cryptocurrencies may…

Ignoring tax evasion and other white collar crimes, selling drugs alone is a $36 trillion dollar a year industry.

We're probably entering an era when enforcement of these kinds of laws will be either impossible or will require draconian surveillance and extreme penalties. Anything short of "iron fist" enforcement will be skirted easily using cryptography, darknets, etc.

Re: Half of ICOs Die Within Four Months After Token Sales Finalized

#206
post #44

Are there any ICOs which resulted in a successful product? Please exclude crypto-exchanges like Binance.

Golem is live. Augur is going live today. MakerDAO has a very interesting stablecoin called Dai that's live. Status' mobile app is now mainnet by default. DigixDAO is live. And many more in testnet phases. But don't let reality mess with the cynical perception that the hn crowd wants to portray!

Oh good, all of those blockchains actually function.

That totally means that they are worth investing in and that the people who created them give a damn about turning it into something more than an ICO...

/s

The question was about success, not trivial viability as a blockchain product.

Re: Half of ICOs Die Within Four Months After Token Sales Finalized

#207

Like it or not blockhains are here to stay. Nobody is going to run behind VCs looking for elite money in 20 years from now. Isnt it obvious? Blockhains are going to redistribute the wealth from the wealthy elite few to the masses. More and more wealth is being generated from nowhere. Just because there are some spammy ICOs now doesn't mean it's the end of the blockhain and ICO. This is going to be another rare instan…

Spoken like someone with zero understanding of economics.

Re: Half of ICOs Die Within Four Months After Token Sales Finalized

#208
post #2

"Still, all investors should probably sell their coins within the first six months, the study found." If all investors should sell their coins, who is the counterparty that should buy them?

Suckers.

That's who bought all my Bitcoins at $20k when I sold them.

Re: Half of ICOs Die Within Four Months After Token Sales Finalized

#209
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your transaction is still being intermediated by an entity that can choose to appropriate your funds otherwise The frequency of each of coins being stolen from wallets, being lost by exchanges or pilfered by ICO frauds is far, far higher than anything happening at proper banks. Blockchains are a neat technology which should have never been marketed as a currency.

> The frequency of each of coins being stolen from wallets, being lost by exchanges or pilfered by ICO frauds is far, far higher than anything happening at proper banks. What does that have to do with what we're talking about?

The statement you are defending was "Being able to transfer value between two parties without having to trust anyone has value." Compared to wire transfers, one is required to trust the intermediary in that case.

I think at that point it becomes fair to ask: what is the likelihood that I am going to lose money unexpectedly to my credit union, or my recipient to her bank? And then by comparison, what is the likelihood that I or my recipient are going to lose money to coin theft, exchange failures, fluctuation in valuation, or other things inherent to dealing with blockchain transfers?

Rightly or wrongly, I think many people would rate potential losses higher with blockchain solutions than with USD wire transfers. I know I would.

Re: Half of ICOs Die Within Four Months After Token Sales Finalized

#210

Do you all have any idea what this is talking about? I've never heard of ICO and you're all using it as if it's some familiar and obvious thing with no explanation.

We all know what we are talking about, it's just that you don't know what an ICO is, and didn't have the wisdom to Google it.
Post reply on HN