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

China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 386 posts

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#61

Post by alex_duf »

nickserv wrote: post #27

Had to dig around 3 sites before finding a definition for ICO: ICO (Initial Crypto-Token Offering) refers to financing through the issuance of encrypted tokens (Crypto-Token).

Thanks.

I read the whole article wondering what on earth it meant. Then I went on Wikipedia which is usually pretty good with TLAs (Three Letters Acronyms).

So I made a point in reading the whole article just to figure out if they were at least defining it loosly...

there's that:

>ICOs involve raising funding by creating and selling new crypto tokens — commonly based on Ethereum — to investors

Which is not really in depth. It got me wondering if the person writing it understood what it meant.

Please don't do that when you write, always assume the person you're writing for doesn't know what you're talking about.

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#62

Post by Tepix »

Is this truly a ban on all ICOs, i.e. the technology? Is there a decent translation of the report at http://www.pbc.gov.cn/goutongjiaoliu/113456/113469/3374222/ ?

I don't see why projects such as "useless etherum token" https://uetoken.com/ should be banned.

You may want to ban trading the token to prevent money laundering but that would apply to all crypto coins.

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#63

Post by verroq »

dmichulke wrote: post #54
richardknop wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That SEC memo was weak. They should have made much more forceful statement. Thousands (likely tens of thousands) of US citizens are still investing in ICOs, there needs to be much stronger action taken to stop their gambling.

Because you and the SEC know much better than all of them? You know we're talking about the same SEC that didn't saw the real estate bubble coming in 2007/08 (size > trillions, CDOs are obviously fine) or the dotcom bubble in 2000 (size > trillions, they approved the IPOs, right)? If so, please give me reasons (instead of opinions or references to SEC "authority") as to why the ICOs in a 175 bn market are "dangerous"…

Most of these ICOs are utter garbage and the only reason people "invest" in a garbage coin is because they think there is some greater fool that will buy it off them.

To give them credit people have made many times their money buying and reselling but it would be idiotic to let this madness continue.

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#64

Post by Laforet »

vit05 wrote: post #31

A lot of people already knew about that and was able to profit in the weekend. Some coins just jumped nowhere and now will crash. Hshare has passed 1 billion market cap and will be probably be evaluated less than 10 million at the end of the day. Walton, Loopring, NAV...

BTCChina's ICOCoin ($insert yo dawg joke here) stopped trading since saturday, I think most sane investors saw this coming from a mile away.

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#65

Post by jaclaz »

CCing wrote: post #19
the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> e-visa You got a link to that how? How does that work with Schengen?

Is not a e-visa...it called e-residency and simply is an ID card for use all the estonian services(like: open a company, pay taxes, open a bank account etc...) It NOT GIVE a work permit in EU and of course not give a permission to travel in schengeng. It's simply an ID card. The main difference is that: - Normally in other EU countries for have an ID card for services, you must live there, while with e-residency you…

>It's pretty useless, you can google it and see how had a lot of hype, but in real case uses, it's useless (example: yes you can open a company remotely, but if you don't live in estonia, is a mess with taxes...

Pheew, I thought I was the only one with this opinion, given the hype there is about this thing all over the net.

To me the whole stuff seems a lot like the plans of the gnomes in South Park (but in five steps):

1) get an e-residency (please read as "pay us some little money")

2) establish an Estonia company (please read as "pay us some more money")

3) open a bank account in this or that bank (please read as "give our friends a little more money")

4) ?

5) Profit.

The only practical use I can see is to create a new sort of Double Irish:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement

but aimed to the single/poor instead of large corporations, but it has to be seen how the EU will take the idea ...

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#66

Post by unkown-unknowns »

Tepix wrote: post #62

Is this truly a ban on all ICOs, i.e. the technology? Is there a decent translation of the report at http://www.pbc.gov.cn/goutongjiaoliu/113456/113469/3374222/ ? I don't see why projects such as "useless etherum token" https://uetoken.com/ should be banned. You may want to ban trading the token to prevent money laundering but that would apply to all crypto coins.

> https://uetoken.com/

Did they actually do an "ICO" or was it showing as "finished" from the get-go?

Let's find out!

30 seconds later.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170627123240/https://uetoken.c...

https://etherchain.org/account/0xbe5c1c298d0088886146a906cdf...

So they did but apparently nobody sent them any money, unless they also used some other addresses.

Another 60 seconds after that.

Actually they have a link on the current https://uetoken.com leading to https://etherchain.org/account/0xbe5c1c298d0088886146a906cdf... with 23562 txns total at the moment. Wonder if any of it was legit and if he got any money out of it.

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#67

Post by Tepix »

unkown-unknowns wrote: post #66
Tepix wrote: post #62

Is this truly a ban on all ICOs, i.e. the technology? Is there a decent translation of the report at http://www.pbc.gov.cn/goutongjiaoliu/113456/113469/3374222/ ? I don't see why projects such as "useless etherum token" https://uetoken.com/ should be banned. You may want to ban trading the token to prevent money laundering but that would apply to all crypto coins.

> https://uetoken.com/ Did they actually do an "ICO" or was it showing as "finished" from the get-go? Let's find out! 30 seconds later. https://web.archive.org/web/20170627123240/https://uetoken.c... https://etherchain.org/account/0xbe5c1c298d0088886146a906cdf... So they did but apparently nobody sent them any money, unless they also used some other addresses. Another 60 seconds after that. Actually they have a link…

I think he got around $90,000 USD out of it.

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#68

Post by temp987654 »

vortico wrote: post #55
billpg wrote: post #10

Yes! We should use PNG files for icons rather than Microsoft's proprietary format. What?

But without ICOs, China will now see nasty missing-file images for all of its programs, since many users still use Windows XP, which doesn't support PNG icons.

This is madness!

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#69

Post by CryptoPunk »

richardknop wrote: post #32

Finally somebody in position of power stepped in to stop this mad online casino. I was not expecting this sensible move from China, was hoping EU or US would lead the way on regulating this crypto fraud. I hope Fed/ECB follow the Chinese Central Bank and ban ICOs too and start regulating crypto and enforcing some basic rules.

It's not sensible at all. It's none of anyone's business what two consenting adults do with their money. The idea of a third party dictating the range of acceptable contractual engagements is absolutely terrible and has profound negative unintended consequences, with the worst of them being licensing barriers to create rent-seeking opportunities (only one new bank created in the UK over the last 100 years).

Re: China's Central Bank Bans ICOs

#70

Post by ryanlol »

verroq wrote: post #63
dmichulke wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you and the SEC know much better than all of them? You know we're talking about the same SEC that didn't saw the real estate bubble coming in 2007/08 (size > trillions, CDOs are obviously fine) or the dotcom bubble in 2000 (size > trillions, they approved the IPOs, right)? If so, please give me reasons (instead of opinions or references to SEC "authority") as to why the ICOs in a 175 bn market are "dangerous"…

Most of these ICOs are utter garbage and the only reason people "invest" in a garbage coin is because they think there is some greater fool that will buy it off them. To give them credit people have made many times their money buying and reselling but it would be idiotic to let this madness continue.

>it would be idiotic to let this madness continue.

Why? Inevitably the fools will just run out of money.

This "problem" seems to take care of itself.

Post reply on HN