Cryptographers Urge People to Abandon IOTA After Leaked Emails

Post by oldcynic » Wed, Feb 28, 2018, 12:27 PM UTC

hal9000xp wrote: post #79

mnw21cam wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet there are some resources that are hard to privatise, for instance the atmosphere. Government regulation is what turns the commons (which are open to tragedy) into either tightly regulated (for example, dumping of hazardous materials) or a free market (for example, emissions trading). Without the government interference, the market wouldn't exist. To some extent that goes all the way down to buying your groceries,…

> nothing would be stopping someone with a bigger gun coming in and stealing whatever groceries they want That's why we need government - to prevent violence and stealing. Free market can work only in non-violence environment. However, government tries to do much more than that. And this I consider as a problem, namely excessive regulation.

Post by infimum » Wed, Feb 28, 2018, 12:31 PM UTC

dingo_bat wrote: post #77

mratzloff wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a conversation with a guy creating a crypto startup recently. It only took five minutes in before the thin veneer of an actual business model fell away and the real motive—free money—starting coming out. His position, distilled: if people are stupid enough to give me money, who am I to say no? I suggested his easy money might not be so easy if (for US investors) the SEC, FTC, CFTC, etc. crack down and claw back…

I agree with your friend. Dumb people will give away their money anyway. Might as well give it to me. What's wrong with free money as long as I'm not doing illegal stuff.

Post by alex_hitchins » Wed, Feb 28, 2018, 1:03 PM UTC

roymurdock wrote: post #84

alex_hitchins wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Morals, ethics?

If investors are giving money based on lies, there’s a legal system in place to help them recover failed fraudulent investments. I’d wager in many cases investors know exactly what they’re investing in. So I don’t see any ethical/moral conflicts in a lot of these BS cryptocurrency schemes, just a lot of wasted potential and a somewhat shameful divergence from the idealistic core tech - private, trustless transactions…

Post by DennisP » Wed, Feb 28, 2018, 1:27 PM UTC

josephagoss wrote: post #20

Roritharr wrote: post #14

The crypto space to me is really frustrating. I've seen friends become something very close to scammers, I can't have interesting technical discussions about the topic without being called doomsayer and even when I pitch an idea what to use the Blockchain for, all I get is:"let's do an ICO and raise a shitton of money!" although that doesn't really make sense towards what I'm proposing. I feel like the nerd in class…

A lot of my ideas for blockchain technology work a lot better using ETH for example, rather than yet another token. I think we'll need to wait a few months/years before the ICO craze dies down and we can get back to focusing on building tech on top of Bitcoin/Ethereum without the word ICO.

Post by phil21 » Wed, Feb 28, 2018, 2:10 PM UTC

mratzloff wrote: post #74

Roritharr wrote: post #14

The crypto space to me is really frustrating. I've seen friends become something very close to scammers, I can't have interesting technical discussions about the topic without being called doomsayer and even when I pitch an idea what to use the Blockchain for, all I get is:"let's do an ICO and raise a shitton of money!" although that doesn't really make sense towards what I'm proposing. I feel like the nerd in class…

I had a conversation with a guy creating a crypto startup recently. It only took five minutes in before the thin veneer of an actual business model fell away and the real motive—free money—starting coming out. His position, distilled: if people are stupid enough to give me money, who am I to say no? I suggested his easy money might not be so easy if (for US investors) the SEC, FTC, CFTC, etc. crack down and claw back…