Slick marketing documents and nice haircuts are not good evidence that some supposed technology would actually work.
-
It's worse than that. Many of the ICOs simply say "technology doesn't exist yet - still on drawing board - invest to make it [maybe] happen"
Not always bad, if they actually proved how it would work through peer-reviewed math based on sound objective assumptions.
![Giacomo Zucco [I identify as a -e^iπ vampire]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1172971162919415813/Pn8O2gkx_normal.jpg)
-
-
I like incentive hacks more: timed release, pledge w/ withdrawal option, pay-on-milestone, etc… Upfront proof is expensive!
-
Excellent argument. But this should not stop us from generalizing ICO investors as stupid and launchers as scammers.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
like
#segwit2X insn'tThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.