4 ms·
I find it weird to even try to bring the ICO (which are the engine of fraud and should be anonymous, or otherwise you get to jail anyway) into legitimate space.
by anovikov 7y ago
I find it weird to even try to bring the ICO (which are the engine of fraud and should be anonymous, or otherwise you get to jail anyway) into legitimate space. Someone apparently lost their sense of limits. It's really difficult to comment on someone trying to make a fully legally compliant ICO and get surprised that it's difficult.
Cryptocurrencies exist to move money out of China by circumventing their currency controls (pay miners in RMB locally, get crypto, send it to Hong Kong, exchange into USD). ICOs are a byproduct of that process and exist merely for scam.
Again, i am not against scam. Scam is fine as long as you aren't getting caught - nearly everything in software in scam directly or indirectly. It's just trying to do scam in the open and getting surprising it's hard is what crosses my mental limits of acceptable chutzpah.
- rolltiide 7y agoScams and circumventing capital controls are two uses cases. People want to use ICOs like they use Kickstarter: to fund a consumptive purchase. Digital assets have the capability of being consumptive. There isnt an obvious way to tell them apart, especially when there is a limited supply and exchange of money. People want there to be an easy way to distinguish business models and assets. So thats where experimenting with different legal theories helps.
- elchupanebre 7y agoWhy downvotes? He is exactly right about crypto (>50% of volume?) being used to move money out of China.
- anovikov 7y agoYes, i agree that they were not invented for that purpose. I think most likely they were invented to make covertly funding U.S. spies abroad, without any paper trail, completely circumventing banking system, easier. It's just what they are mainly used now.
- Lucadg 7y agoLegal ICOs are STOs and not surprisingly they have a hard time getting off the ground.