Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slashdot)   Over half of all new crypto-currencies offerings fail within 4 months. "Acquiring coins in an ICO and selling them on the first day is the safest investment strategy"   ( news.slashdot.org) divider line
    More: Fail, Investment, Boston College study, safest investment strategy, coin offerings, token sales die, savings account, blue chip companies, long term buy  
•       •       •

449 clicks; posted to Business » on 11 Jul 2018 at 8:51 PM (9 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



43 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2018-07-11 07:35:08 PM  
Make sure to safe often and don't let Yorda wander off.
 
2018-07-11 08:47:50 PM  
Having a Brinks armored car overturn on the road in front of you is the safest strategy
 
2018-07-11 09:02:36 PM  
Duh. Once the "founders" have the suckers' money, there's no need to carry on with the charade. I'm surprised there are any that last past 4 months.
 
hej
2018-07-11 09:05:47 PM  
Did the money backing the Obvious tag evaporate?
 
2018-07-11 09:06:14 PM  
encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.comView Full Size
 
2018-07-11 09:08:57 PM  
steemitimages.comView Full Size
 
2018-07-11 09:11:16 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-07-11 09:11:16 PM  
CryptoCalls Elite
Youtube -3wUe2N2_OY
 
2018-07-11 09:33:33 PM  
I should just start writing symbols on napkins, tear off pieces and start offering them at $10 a piece. "IPO of Napkincoin! The only cryptocurrency that has a physical denomination!"
 
2018-07-11 09:43:29 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size
 
2018-07-11 09:49:13 PM  

Ishkur: I should just start writing symbols on napkins, tear off pieces and start offering them at $10 a piece. "IPO of Napkincoin! The only cryptocurrency that has a physical denomination!"


On the plus side you won't be homeless
 
2018-07-11 10:23:43 PM  

Ishkur: I should just start writing symbols on napkins, tear off pieces and start offering them at $10 a piece. "IPO of Napkincoin! The only cryptocurrency that has a physical denomination!"


Is it hosted in the cloud?
 
2018-07-11 10:29:47 PM  
i've just shifted everything into a diversified crypto-zoology portfolio, mostly in bigfoot, the rest in chupacabra/loch ness monster.
 
2018-07-11 10:33:22 PM  

crinz83: i've just shifted everything into a diversified crypto-zoology portfolio, mostly in bigfoot, the rest in chupacabra/loch ness monster.


I'm long on Moth-Men.
 
2018-07-11 10:38:56 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-07-11 11:13:08 PM  
Face it... you didn't buy $1,000 in Bitcoin at 50 cents a coin and have $12 million now.   Get over it, it isn't going to happen again in crypto currencies.
 
2018-07-11 11:45:55 PM  

Ishkur: I should just start writing symbols on napkins, tear off pieces and start offering them at $10 a piece. "IPO of Napkincoin! The only cryptocurrency that has a physical denomination!"


"Once upon a time, people thought gold was intrinsically valuable, so they used it as money. Eventually they realized that carrying around pieces of paper that said "exchangeable for one gold" was more convenient than carrying around the actual gold, particularly if there were sufficiently robust legal mechanisms to make sure that the paper was actually exchangeable for the gold. And then the pieces of paper-and even more abstract instruments, like electronic ledgers listing how many pieces of paper each person owned-became just incredibly, incredibly convenient, a centerpiece of an economic life that was vastly richer and more efficient than the old economy where you had to cart around gold ingots. And then one day, after many years of this, the government said "you know what, these pieces of paper aren't exchangeable for gold anymore." And everyone just sort of shrugged and said, it's fine, we like the paper, it's not like we were exchanging it for gold much anyway, that was a nice idea but it's not really central to how the system actually operates. And now the pieces of paper work because they work, not because they reference some other thing.
.
.
.
And sure it says on page 1 of the textbook that the share of stock represents a claim on the future cash flows of the corporation, and sure that fact is in some sense the foundation on which the whole thing rests. But the whole thing is good,and people and business models and industries rely on it, and the notion of treating shares of stock as part-ownership in a corporation is so useful that it doesn't particularly matter if it's true. The shares of stock have a particular kind of value because everyone treats them as having that particular kind of value, and everyone treats them that way because that is a
collectively useful way to live. It turns out in practice that if you chip away at the foundation, the edifice is so artfully constructed that it will keep on standing in midair.

Incidentally this mostly explains initial coin offerings too."

From today's "Money Stuff" by Matt Levine.
 
2018-07-12 12:24:34 AM  
I have a buddy that was real bullish on cryptocurrencies last year. Every week he was putting out a column on how they're the money of the future. I should message him and see how that worked out.
I'm guessing not too well. He hasn't quit his day job.
 
2018-07-12 12:30:19 AM  
Crypto currencies are pyramid schemes.
 
2018-07-12 01:08:34 AM  

Emposter: Crypto currencies are pyramid schemes.


Whatever, I bought 12 servers in Iceland running on geothermal the other month.  I'll be rolling soon.

/I bought some Mary Kay products too, for a contingency plan.
 
2018-07-12 01:57:42 AM  

BumpInTheNight: Ishkur: I should just start writing symbols on napkins, tear off pieces and start offering them at $10 a piece. "IPO of Napkincoin! The only cryptocurrency that has a physical denomination!"

Is it hosted in the cloud?


Yes!

*shows cotton balls*
 
2018-07-12 02:00:36 AM  

itcamefromschenectady: Ishkur: I should just start writing symbols on napkins, tear off pieces and start offering them at $10 a piece. "IPO of Napkincoin! The only cryptocurrency that has a physical denomination!"

"Once upon a time, people thought gold was intrinsically valuable, so they used it as money. Eventually they realized that carrying around pieces of paper that said "exchangeable for one gold" was more convenient than carrying around the actual gold, particularly if there were sufficiently robust legal mechanisms to make sure that the paper was actually exchangeable for the gold. And then the pieces of paper-and even more abstract instruments, like electronic ledgers listing how many pieces of paper each person owned-became just incredibly, incredibly convenient, a centerpiece of an economic life that was vastly richer and more efficient than the old economy where you had to cart around gold ingots. And then one day, after many years of this, the government said "you know what, these pieces of paper aren't exchangeable for gold anymore." And everyone just sort of shrugged and said, it's fine, we like the paper, it's not like we were exchanging it for gold much anyway, that was a nice idea but it's not really central to how the system actually operates. And now the pieces of paper work because they work, not because they reference some other thing.
.
.
.
And sure it says on page 1 of the textbook that the share of stock represents a claim on the future cash flows of the corporation, and sure that fact is in some sense the foundation on which the whole thing rests. But the whole thing is good,and people and business models and industries rely on it, and the notion of treating shares of stock as part-ownership in a corporation is so useful that it doesn't particularly matter if it's true. The shares of stock have a particular kind of value because everyone treats them as having that particular kind of value, and everyone treats them that way because that is a
collectively useful w ...


Not quite.

You're missing one crucial thing.
 
2018-07-12 06:54:22 AM  

Ishkur: I should just start writing symbols on napkins, tear off pieces and start offering them at $10 a piece. "IPO of Napkincoin! The only cryptocurrency that has a physical denomination!"


Needs more blockchain.
 
2018-07-12 08:32:28 AM  
People who buy random coins in ICOs make people who buy Bitcoins look like Warren Buffett.
 
2018-07-12 08:35:27 AM  

theflatline: [steemitimages.com image 850x531]


Bitcoin is very volatile.

Napalm Death - You Suffer
Youtube ybGOT4d2Hs8
 
2018-07-12 09:47:42 AM  

King Something: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 850x531]


This is less like the tulip bubble and more just a straight up scam of selling an over-hyped but inherently worthless product
 
2018-07-12 09:52:59 AM  

Ishkur: BumpInTheNight: Ishkur: I should just start writing symbols on napkins, tear off pieces and start offering them at $10 a piece. "IPO of Napkincoin! The only cryptocurrency that has a physical denomination!"

Is it hosted in the cloud?

Yes!

*shows cotton balls*

img.fark.netView Full Size

 
2018-07-12 11:51:11 AM  
No, the safest strategy is to come up with a BS reason why YOUR blockchain is SUPER UNIQUE, generate a bunch of keys beforehand, and THEN do an ICO immediately after which you sell everything you've got.

Ah, the wonders of finance in a totally unregulated market.
 
2018-07-12 12:03:13 PM  

dletter: Face it... you didn't buy $1,000 in Bitcoin at 50 cents a coin and have $12 million now.   Get over it, it isn't going to happen again in crypto currencies.


There is a farker out there that did.  He posts occasionally.   I'm up a fair bit too.

Most ICOs nowadays are scams, and the next few years will see a consolidation of cryptocurrencies down from 1000+ that are available to the 20 or so that actually have value.  It will be a bloodbath for many, but the survivors will be established and used.  Most of them won't be 'currencies', but blockchain solutions.
 
2018-07-12 12:07:24 PM  

Lord Bear: dletter: Face it... you didn't buy $1,000 in Bitcoin at 50 cents a coin and have $12 million now.   Get over it, it isn't going to happen again in crypto currencies.

There is a farker out there that did.  He posts occasionally.   I'm up a fair bit too.

Most ICOs nowadays are scams, and the next few years will see a consolidation of cryptocurrencies down from 1000+ that are available to the 20 or so that actually have value.  It will be a bloodbath for many, but the survivors will be established and used.  Most of them won't be 'currencies', but blockchain solutions.


Oh, I know some too.  I don't know how much they have, but, my wife says they have "a lot", and the couple are both doctors, so, I could have seen him drop $15-20k on bitcoin on a lark... now whether he bought at $100 or $10 or $1 I don't know, and liquidating $10-20+ million of bitcoin is likely no easy task, but, you are least still have that stuff worth tens of millions there you can sell off a bit at a time of.

But, it is like many internet things (like the Million pixels page guy)... the first person(s) who do it can make out well, but, after that people aren't going to push the hype.
 
2018-07-12 12:18:39 PM  

dletter: But, it is like many internet things (like the Million pixels page guy)... the first person(s) who do it can make out well, but, after that people aren't going to push the hype.


I agree.  Bitcoin is the 'Name' of cryptos right now.  Its not the best, but its the first, and the one that people know about.  Most other cryptos follow the price of bitcoin.

The technology is new and exciting and there is great opportunity to make cash on it.  I've been diversifying my crypto portfolio lately.  I've added positions in Neo, Nano, Ethereum, Ark, Vechain, and Waltonchain.  Most of them aren't trying to be currencies, but platforms and supply chain solutions.  Some will be winners, some losers, but that's investing in a nutshell.
 
2018-07-12 01:46:36 PM  

Lord Bear: dletter: But, it is like many internet things (like the Million pixels page guy)... the first person(s) who do it can make out well, but, after that people aren't going to push the hype.

I agree.  Bitcoin is the 'Name' of cryptos right now.  Its not the best, but its the first, and the one that people know about.  Most other cryptos follow the price of bitcoin.

The technology is new and exciting and there is great opportunity to make cash on it.  I've been diversifying my crypto portfolio lately.  I've added positions in Neo, Nano, Ethereum, Ark, Vechain, and Waltonchain.  Most of them aren't trying to be currencies, but platforms and supply chain solutions.  Some will be winners, some losers, but that's investing in a nutshell.


Austin Powers 'Help! I'm in a Nutshell!'
Youtube jKMK3XGO27k
 
2018-07-12 02:11:18 PM  
A buddy of mine founded Digibyte.  Four years ago, he gave me 20,000 DGB and I forgot about it.  Letting it ride.
 
2018-07-12 02:49:42 PM  

Don the Plastic Shroud: A buddy of mine founded Digibyte.  Four years ago, he gave me 20,000 DGB and I forgot about it.  Letting it ride.


Probably should have gotten out when it went above 10 cents... looks to be back around 3 cents now.
 
2018-07-12 04:15:02 PM  

Dick Gozinya: but that's investing in a nutshell.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/jKMK3XGO​27k?start=4]


If it ends up with me lying in bed with 1990s Elizabeth Hurley, I'll take it!
 
2018-07-12 06:25:10 PM  

Lord Bear: Dick Gozinya: but that's investing in a nutshell.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/jKMK3XGO​27k?start=4]

If it ends up with me lying in bed with 1990s Elizabeth Hurley, I'll take it!


Yeah, but just remember that Hugh Grant still had to go out for prostitutes when he was with her back then. So, she may not be all that and a bag of chips.
 
2018-07-12 07:38:36 PM  

Ishkur: Not quite.

You're missing one crucial thing.


I could write a nitpicking critique myself, but I just like the writing style.
 
2018-07-12 08:00:12 PM  

itcamefromschenectady: Ishkur: I should just start writing symbols on napkins, tear off pieces and start offering them at $10 a piece. "IPO of Napkincoin! The only cryptocurrency that has a physical denomination!"

"Once upon a time, people thought gold was intrinsically valuable, so they used it as money. Eventually they realized that carrying around pieces of paper that said "exchangeable for one gold" was more convenient than carrying around the actual gold, particularly if there were sufficiently robust legal mechanisms to make sure that the paper was actually exchangeable for the gold. And then the pieces of paper-and even more abstract instruments, like electronic ledgers listing how many pieces of paper each person owned-became just incredibly, incredibly convenient, a centerpiece of an economic life that was vastly richer and more efficient than the old economy where you had to cart around gold ingots. And then one day, after many years of this, the government said "you know what, these pieces of paper aren't exchangeable for gold anymore." And everyone just sort of shrugged and said, it's fine, we like the paper, it's not like we were exchanging it for gold much anyway, that was a nice idea but it's not really central to how the system actually operates. And now the pieces of paper work because they work, not because they reference some other thing.
.
.
.
And sure it says on page 1 of the textbook that the share of stock represents a claim on the future cash flows of the corporation, and sure that fact is in some sense the foundation on which the whole thing rests. But the whole thing is good,and people and business models and industries rely on it, and the notion of treating shares of stock as part-ownership in a corporation is so useful that it doesn't particularly matter if it's true. The shares of stock have a particular kind of value because everyone treats them as having that particular kind of value, and everyone treats them that way because that is a
collectively useful way to live. It turns out in practice that if you chip away at the foundation, the edifice is so artfully constructed that it will keep on standing in midair.

Incidentally this mostly explains initial coin offerings too."

From today's "Money Stuff" by Matt Levine.


He's not wrong.  In some parts of Asia and Latin America, even obvious counterfeit USDs have legal tender because both parties to a transaction have the same understanding of the value of said piece of paper.

However, the same can not be said of crypto currencies, yet. Until people actually start buying stuff other than illegal drugs and Youtubers' old lamborghinis with crypto currencies, it will remain a bubble that risks bursting at any given moment.
 
2018-07-12 11:45:56 PM  

itcamefromschenectady: Ishkur: Not quite.

You're missing one crucial thing.

I could write a nitpicking critique myself, but I just like the writing style.


Well you're in luck: I'm too lazy today so I don't feel like writing a response. So you dodged a bullet this time.

But the quick n dirty answer is: There's no such thing as anything having "intrinsic value". Something has value when the strongest entity in the area declares that it have value (and tightly regulates and controls it). Even gold was considered worthless by some societies until their ruling groups (or an invading one) told them it was valuable.

Currencies are backed by centralized authorities. Always have been. That gives them an air of trust and security. Crypto currencies are backed by nothing. You might as well invest in my napkincoins today.
 
2018-07-12 11:59:19 PM  

Ishkur: itcamefromschenectady: Ishkur: Not quite.

You're missing one crucial thing.

I could write a nitpicking critique myself, but I just like the writing style.

Well you're in luck: I'm too lazy today so I don't feel like writing a response. So you dodged a bullet this time.

But the quick n dirty answer is: There's no such thing as anything having "intrinsic value". Something has value when the strongest entity in the area declares that it have value (and tightly regulates and controls it). Even gold was considered worthless by some societies until their ruling groups (or an invading one) told them it was valuable.

Currencies are backed by centralized authorities. Always have been. That gives them an air of trust and security. Crypto currencies are backed by nothing. You might as well invest in my napkincoins today.


No, that's just not true.

"In the United States, the Free Banking Era lasted between 1837 and 1866, when almost anyone could issue paper money. States, municipalities, private banks, railroad and construction companies, stores, restaurants, churches and individuals printed an estimated 8,000 different types of money by 1860. If an issuer went bankrupt, closed, left town, or otherwise went out of business, the note would be worthless."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private​_​currency
 
2018-07-13 01:05:12 AM  

itcamefromschenectady: No, that's just not true.

"In the United States, the Free Banking Era lasted between 1837 and 1866, when almost anyone could issue paper money. States, municipalities, private banks, railroad and construction companies, stores, restaurants, churches and individuals printed an estimated 8,000 different types of money by 1860. If an issuer went bankrupt, closed, left town, or otherwise went out of business, the note would be worthless."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_​currency


You're not looking at this broadly enough.

A centralized authority does not have to be a government, although governments make the best centralized authorities. By definition all banks are centralized authorities.

Currency is always created by and backed by the strongest entity in the area. It works best with governments and banks, but it even applies on a limited scale to micro-currencies like Disney bucks, video arcade tokens, Itchy & Scratchy money, store credits or even scrip. A currency has as much value as the people have faith in the authority to authenticate its value. This has always been the case, going back to the first coins minted in Lydia in 500 BC.

People do not trust currencies backed by nothing, or backed by entities with a history of fraud and abuse. And they definitely don't trust each other. People like to be assured that their investments are safe. And owning and using a particular currency is one of the biggest investment decisions you can make.

The US Dollar is a creation of the US government. The US Dollar has value because the US government protects the worth and value of the US Dollar. People have faith in the US Dollar's value and they use it because they have trust in the US Government's ability to back up the value of the US Dollar (with force if necessary). So long as the people have trust and faith in the US government and its continued existence (it is, for all intents and purposes, immortal), the US dollar will always have value.

A private currency can never guarantee that level of trust.
 
2018-07-13 01:58:37 AM  

Ishkur: itcamefromschenectady: No, that's just not true.

"In the United States, the Free Banking Era lasted between 1837 and 1866, when almost anyone could issue paper money. States, municipalities, private banks, railroad and construction companies, stores, restaurants, churches and individuals printed an estimated 8,000 different types of money by 1860. If an issuer went bankrupt, closed, left town, or otherwise went out of business, the note would be worthless."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_​currency

You're not looking at this broadly enough.

A centralized authority does not have to be a government, although governments make the best centralized authorities. By definition all banks are centralized authorities.

Currency is always created by and backed by the strongest entity in the area.


To the extent that your statement is falsifiable, it seems clearly wrong with numerous counterexamples. If you're going to twist around so it can't be falsified you're just being argumentative and annoying by putting up tautologies.

When banks issue currency, it's not exclusive to an area.

The farking dollar itself used to be a name applied to currency that was foreign to the US. Today, the converse situation exists - people in other countries use the US dollar independent of any local authority.

What about where people use cigarettes as currency? There's no authority that issues them and sets the value, people just do it.

I think your perspective may be lacking because you're not considering that when money was mostly gold and silver coins, it didn't matter who minted it, it had value anywhere that people recognized the amount of intrinsic value. So people could use all sorts of money in parallel.
 
2018-07-13 05:48:21 AM  

itcamefromschenectady: When banks issue currency, it's not exclusive to an area.


When a bank issues a currency, it is exclusive to whoever uses the bank or whoever has trust in the bank's ability to authenticate the value of the currency.. That's what makes it a centralized authority -- that people are going to a specific entity to get their currency.

There's no way around this.

itcamefromschenectady: What about where people use cigarettes as currency?


Cigarettes are issued by the tobacco companies that make them. No one is making new cigarettes in prison from raw resources.

itcamefromschenectady: I think your perspective may be lacking because you're not considering that when money was mostly gold and silver coins, it didn't matter who minted it, it had value anywhere that people recognized the amount of intrinsic value.


You're thinking about this backwards.

The currency came first, then people started thinking of gold and silver as having "intrinsic value". There are tons of societies that have no concept of money that see gold as worthless (or, that is, not worthy of hoarding).

Gold/silver doesn't have any intrinsic value. It was used as a unit of exchange because it was relatively heavy which made a diminutive amount perfect for value comparisons (weight was everything in the ancient world, hence why alchemists kept trying to turn lead into gold because it's just as heavy).

But why gold and silver? Several theories, such as gold and silver is often found in pure form (rarely in alloys or compounds), and did not rust or corrode, and was also easy to shape and work with (ie: mint). But the most probable reason was that mining (of ANYTHING) was an expensive, time-consuming and labor intensive operation that no private citizen could afford so the entire industry was almost always controlled by the state, by necessity.

And if the state has full control of rare mineral operations, then it can issue currency.
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report