[junippor]

Could you clarify how this has anything to do with crypto?

It seems to me that you're acting as a fundraising platform: people give you money, you pass it on to startups, and you guarantee these people that they own some equity in the startup.

The concept of "own some equity" is a legal concept, and this is what you have to nail down. Crypto is irrelevant to this conversation.

[minasmarios]

Instead of money, just Crypto. So early Startups/ Projects get funded as fast someone sends'em some coins. And the investors to be nerds/ crypto investors and can invest them on startups.

So the value is Startups will be really easily funded, fast and by anyone, disregarding the regulations and limits for fundraising with conventional money.

[junippor]

Again, the limitations with funding with money aren't a tech problem. The limitation aren't "regulations", or how "fast" you can send money. They're a legal one. There's literally no obstacle in wiring some startup some money. Where an obstacle DOES exist, is in you being able to credibly defend a claim on that equity in a court.

Imagine the following situation:

You: "I own 10% of the startup"

Judge: "You have no contract that proves that...."

You: "But I sent crypto instead of money!!"

Judge: "Oh in that case...!"

It's like when the word "crypto" is involved, people immediately surrender any critical thinking :-|