|
|
|
|
|
|
by newfocogi
2916 days ago
|
|
|
The more I watch the crypto space, the more I observe that it has developed an inherently misaligned set of incentives. The people who are creating headlines for each new approach are the ones who have already bought in and will benefit most from others being convinced of its value and buying in as well. Just like it took decades for it to be common for personal financial advisors to be fiduciaries, I wonder if there is space for "experts" who commit to not having a stake in any crypto and just commenting on which ones seems to be creating real technological value. I might support a patreon for that. Of course, anonymity on the blockchain would make it hard to "trust" that these "experts" were really unbiased. P.S. I know crypto is better used to refer to cryptographic technology as a whole, but referring to this area as "cryptocurrency" is insufficient since many are trying to move beyond being currencies, and "blockchain" is insufficient because many are trying alternatives to the basic blockchain introduced by bitcoin. |
|
|
Yes. Pyramid scheme. Rather than passively waiting for others to be convinced of it's value, most of the scam coin ICOs actively pay influencers on twitter[1], reddit and telegram and other channels a lot of money to shill / "promote" their sh*t coins...
[1] $105K for McAfee to tweet: https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/2/17189880/john-mcafee-bitco...
Related: If you ever wondered how ICOs get a lot of attention even if they suck here are some hints. => https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/8g8opf/if_y...