As you said a lone dev (or small group) could create Bitcoin, without any financial reward, except their early knowledge and therefore investment advantage over others.
ICOs are not a good development, because now we see devs getting the money ahead of time, and having the early investment opportunity. Also the concepts of fair coin distribution are being thrown away, if you miss an ICO or cant get subscribed before the time limit, you are frozen out as the post ICO hysteria forces you to buy in at inflated rates.
With the standard coin issues of the Bitcoin era, you usually had months/years to become aware, research, see if the devs were really progressing towards a working model, then buy in, still at a low rate.
So the complaint is, new people are trying and it's too fast? And you can't make money at it?
Actually no, Im concerned its over-heating the space as everyone scrabbles to buy into vapourware while actual working projects, get underfunded.
Which "actual" projects are underfunded. All I hear is how "this is the easiest fund raising environment ever". And is it "over"heating or just right? Maybe too cold?
speed of growth and investment is not a corollary to a bubble. Your uncomfort, not liking specific projects, etc, is the whole REASON to leave it alone. Not you, not I, noone knows what'll work long term. The ONLY way to know is it try.
this makes no sense... if a project is underfunded in this space it's for lack of making some minimal effort or the core group isn't listening to their community or user base... you would be surprised how money seems to flow in the right directions when you listen to people...
The problem is once you allow the regulators to step in on one part of it, you open the door to the entire system being regulated, and that is the antithesis of cryptocurrency to begin with. Education is a better option, and services that can impartially look at the new ICO on their own merit. Is it using new tech or algorithm or just a cloned coin? Is the purpose of the ICO to further an existing business, or is the coin the only asset of the devs? What does it bring to the table other coins do not? We can do far more through education and accurate information than we can on regulation.
Exactly. And every part of the ecosystem should play a role. Exchanges, attorneys, developers, etc... We can never stop a website from putting up code but we can Name/Shame the real scams. Just watch out for "the boy who cried wolf"
Yeah Im not in favour of regulation, Im just ICO-wary.
As we all should be. But there's a big difference between "I'm wary", and "EVERYTHING IS A SCAM"...
And thats why I never accused any project of being a scam, I tend to believe devs have the best of intentions, but making a coin in short supply via an ICO to get huge publicity, in my humble opinion isnt ideal when nothing close to an operational product has been delivered.
Individual investor decision IMHO. Everyone has a different risk appetite.
Agreed, Im not trying to say there isnt a place for ICOs, ever, under any circumstances, but I miss the old days of devs delivering something, then it getting adopted.