4 ms·

Sure, because anyone can create and list a token on Uniswap. The only cost are the gas fees. That doesn't mean those tokens have any real liquidity or are being

Sure, because anyone can create and list a token on Uniswap. The only cost are the gas fees. That doesn't mean those tokens have any real liquidity or are being used. Just like anyone can create a website and put it online. The only cost are the hosting fees. That doesn't mean it'll get any visitors.

eli 4y ago
Yet 97% of websites will not steal your money.
- lb4r 4y ago
  97% of emails probably will though.
  - piva00 4y ago
    People don't usually trade emails for money though.
    - lb4r 4y ago
      Of course not, but the point is that the lower the barrier to entry is, the greater the scammer-to-non-scammer ratio will be, as long as money is involved, or could be involved, either directly or indirectly.
    - 40four 4y ago
      The point is that an unsuspecting/ naive user of malicious emails will be tricked into giving away their personal or banking info. Or sending money to “renew their car warranty” and what have you. I don’t see how that’s any different that an unsuspecting/ native user rushing head first into some random scam coin they have no business paying for and getting rugged. Some people are stupid. That will always be the case. And there will always be dirtbags trying to take advantage of them. That’s a part of life. Has nothing to do with the underlying technology of crypto.
- prvit 4y ago
  Are you sure? For each “real” website there were probably 100 throwaway phishing sites.
  - eli 4y ago
    No most websites are not phishing
- mumblemumble 4y ago
  This seems like an unfair retort to me. The point of the website analogy was not to suggest that the percentage of malicious websites is comparable to the number of malicious coins. It was to draw an analogy to another distributed system with low barriers to entry and where people dabble semi-seriously. I think that the parent makes a fair point. I'm willing to go so far as to agree that suddenly yanking support for a coin you created and put up for sale on a public marketplace can be described as pulling the rug on that coin. I don't think I would assume, though, that doing so necessarily constitutes a deliberate attempt to scam people. Is it irresponsible? Perhaps. Though that's a somewhat subjective judgment, and I recognize that the crypto community's culture around these things runs in sharp contrast to how I think about public marketplaces, so perhaps it wouldn't be fair of me to make a value judgment. Is it worrying? I suppose I can appreciate arguments that the kinds of regulation necessary to prevent such behavior are themselves harmful, and that this sort of thing is acceptable or even desirable insofar as it indicates the market's level of freedom. I can't bring myself to agree, though. I personally would not want to participate in a securities exchange where such behavior is rampant. But not all worrying or irresponsible behavior is a scam.

eli 4y ago

Yet 97% of websites will not steal your money.

lb4r 4y ago
97% of emails probably will though.
- piva00 4y ago
  People don't usually trade emails for money though.
  - lb4r 4y ago
    Of course not, but the point is that the lower the barrier to entry is, the greater the scammer-to-non-scammer ratio will be, as long as money is involved, or could be involved, either directly or indirectly.
  - 40four 4y ago
    The point is that an unsuspecting/ naive user of malicious emails will be tricked into giving away their personal or banking info. Or sending money to “renew their car warranty” and what have you. I don’t see how that’s any different that an unsuspecting/ native user rushing head first into some random scam coin they have no business paying for and getting rugged. Some people are stupid. That will always be the case. And there will always be dirtbags trying to take advantage of them. That’s a part of life. Has nothing to do with the underlying technology of crypto.
prvit 4y ago
Are you sure? For each “real” website there were probably 100 throwaway phishing sites.
- eli 4y ago
  No most websites are not phishing
mumblemumble 4y ago
This seems like an unfair retort to me. The point of the website analogy was not to suggest that the percentage of malicious websites is comparable to the number of malicious coins. It was to draw an analogy to another distributed system with low barriers to entry and where people dabble semi-seriously. I think that the parent makes a fair point. I'm willing to go so far as to agree that suddenly yanking support for a coin you created and put up for sale on a public marketplace can be described as pulling the rug on that coin. I don't think I would assume, though, that doing so necessarily constitutes a deliberate attempt to scam people. Is it irresponsible? Perhaps. Though that's a somewhat subjective judgment, and I recognize that the crypto community's culture around these things runs in sharp contrast to how I think about public marketplaces, so perhaps it wouldn't be fair of me to make a value judgment. Is it worrying? I suppose I can appreciate arguments that the kinds of regulation necessary to prevent such behavior are themselves harmful, and that this sort of thing is acceptable or even desirable insofar as it indicates the market's level of freedom. I can't bring myself to agree, though. I personally would not want to participate in a securities exchange where such behavior is rampant. But not all worrying or irresponsible behavior is a scam.