5 ms·
The funny thing about ICOs is that anyone in the world can invest anonymously AND GET PAID BACK anonymously even if they have no money, don't have a bank accoun
by narrator 9y ago
The funny thing about ICOs is that anyone in the world can invest anonymously AND GET PAID BACK anonymously even if they have no money, don't have a bank account, are a fugitive, in Iran or North Korea, are in prison, have unpaid child support obligations, have large unpaid IRS tax liabilities, or government fines and penalties or are using stolen funds. All the little knobs and levers that governments use to financially control people are rendered useless. The guys taking the money don't know who their investors are, so they can't discriminate. This is probably why they are so popular even though the risks are ludicrous.
- leereeves 9y agoThat's certainly one big reason why they're popular. Many of the most popular uses for cryptocurrencies are strictly illegal.
- brndnmtthws 9y agoI really doubt that. It's definitely a thing that people parrot around, but it's not likely to make up more than 5% of the actual use. Transacting in cash USD is still the preferred currency of the cartels.
- emodendroket 9y agoThe question isn't what percentage of black-market sales are BTC; it's what percentage of BTC sales (excluding speculation) are black-market.
- leereeves 9y agoAnd a related question, which I'd love to know the answer to: What are the other major uses (excluding speculation) of BTC?
- kovek 9y agoSending funds to family in a different country. It's a use case I have not had experience with but which I think makes sense.
- leereeves 9y agoIs it really cheaper or easier to buy BTC, transfer them, then sell them than to transfer money through a traditional service?
- nrhk 9y agoFaster and cheaper with segwit not sure what its like currently. I transferred 5k to someone in 40 seconds for like a 20 cent fee with Eth a few months ago, it could be 100k and the fee would stay the same too. You also get the money immediately without it going through the ACH network.
- leereeves 9y agoThat's if you already have BTC and the person you're transferring to wants BTC, but if you're simply using BTC as a way to transfer fiat money from one country to another, there are more fees and delays in the buying and selling.
- tombot9000 9y agoThe valuation of BTC is also a derivatives market of illegal activity, something which is not illegal itself.
- wolco 9y agoStrictly legal? What about semi legal (legal but not everywhere) or shaming purchases (sex dolls) or discounted purchases
- conanbatt 9y agoYes! This is a great example of how costly regulation actually is. I am horrified at the SEC, not at ICO's. Figure how all that moeny could be going, for example, to YC startups, for a fraction of what they give investors.
- emodendroket 9y agoThe SEC came into being because without it a bunch of people were being scammed. Which is exactly what we're seeing with ICOs. I don't see what's horrifying.
- conanbatt 9y agoAre you sure they are the same people. That is the people being scammed and the people asking for the SEC?
- summer_steven 9y agoSo it used to be "only white, male landowners are responsible enough to invest" and now its "only the very richest Americans are responsible enough to invest". The SEC is blatantly discriminating. Why can't I sign a piece of paper and accept responsibility for myself? I'm a grown man with 200k+ in assets, I don't need the government to protect me.
- gamblor956 9y agoIf you're a grown man with $200k+ in assets, you appear to qualify to be an accredited investor and you don't need the government to protect you...which is the point of the accredited investor rules. You have the financial resources to absorb a few bad investments/scams. Most people don't have the resources to absorb even one bad investment.
- summer_steven 9y agoIn the United States, to be considered an accredited investor, one must have a net worth of at least $1,000,000, excluding the value of one's primary residence, or have income at least $200,000 each year for the last two years (or $300,000 combined income if married
- emodendroket 9y ago> This is probably why they are so popular even though the risks are ludicrous. I'm thinking a lot of investors don't care about this and just have dollar signs in their eyes.
- notahacker 9y agoYup. Whether the transaction is anonymous or not should make no difference to your decision to not to stick your capital into something which looks and quacks like a scam. Just because your circumstances deprive you of (tax free) access to investment products with market returns doesn't mean you have to roll dice on riskier negative sum bets than whatever you currently hide your wealth in. The average person chucking large sums of money at dodgy ICOs is a libertarian cryptobull with a contemptuous attitude towards the idea of legally enforceable contracts and securities laws, not a North Korean without access to a banking system.
- xadhominemx 9y agoI don't think ICOs are popular because sophisticated investors with unpaid child support claims suddenly have a place to park their cash.
- ataturk 9y agoThat sounds like a good thing--I am really tired of how the government puts its thumb over everyone and makes them poorer. Even people who owe child support are victims in a sense. Not that deadbeats deserve much consideration, but we all know that the court-ordered obligations these men face are ruinous.
- patrickk 9y agoThe best case scenario is that any regular person with an internet connection and a small initial amount of capital can experience venture capital style returns. Since the most recent trend is for growing startups to delay longer and longer before going public, this is potentially a way to level the playing field, since very few people can actually invest in pre-IPO companies.