|
|
|
|
|
by happybeing
1928 days ago
|
|
I get this is a popular view, and justifiably so. The project is not a get rich scheme for the founder, you will see that if you look at how it was created and the structures that support it (which include a Scottish Charity that owns the company MaidSafe which is building the first version, but then aims to remove itself from control in favour of decentralised development funded by the network itself). And there is good reason why they chose an ICO over alternatives. You don't say what you favour, but what this project has achieved by this route is complete independence to deliver according to fundamental principles. They have no VC investment, nobody has control who is not aligned with the goal to create a fully autonomous, decentralised network and the "fundamentals" of Safe Network which you can read up on if you want. So the project continues to aim at a hard target regardless of many opportunities to get rich along the way. It was I think the first ICO, so if getting rich was the aim it could have happened many times by now. As things stand it is a shame that people are turned off from even looking into this project because of that association. Once it emerges I think the value it provides rather than captures will change minds. If you want to know what the target is you can read about the Fundamentals of Safe Network here:
https://safenetforum.org/t/safe-network-fundamentals-context... |
|