"""
The Breitmans began Tezos, which is a software platform, four years ago in a bid to address some of the governance issues that have surrounded other cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin....
The ensuing dispute over control of the $232 million ...
"""
The Breitmans took over the project less than a year before the ICO. Proof can be found on twitter, where the original paper's author posted that he is handing the project over.
Pretty amazing how they managed to raise this much money, i thought it would just fizzle out after they have raised such absorbident amounts of money they would run out of incentive. its not like a traditional acquisition where they are contractually obliged to make good on their ICO promises, ICO participants often forget they are in a sense buying part of a company that is up for sale (why?).
For a legitimate Crypto company that hasn't ICO'ed or raised money checkout my company https://bitbank.nz which is forecasting cryptocurrency prices :)
Can someone explain how one foundation (that manages a BILLION dollars) can simply be replaced by a new foundation?
Having talked to some lawyers in this space during the last weeks I have come to understand how much money is involved here in compensation/fees/listing-fees/advisor-compensation/etc. It is insane. So not really surprised any more regarding their internal conflicts for $$$.
And then you look at Ethereum which is a $90B valuation and also wonder if it can have competitors. Tezos is a full fledged Eth competitor with its own USPs.
Given that Ethereum is open source, the real value comes from their ecosystem (broadly defined).
What if Microsoft branched Ethereum and created MicroCoins, and moved a few hundred developers and researchers from Microsoft Research onto the project, and then created incentives to rapidly scale up miners and other parts of the ecosystem. Would they create $xx billion in value?
Crypto prices could continue to rise, and since I own a few coins and tokens for fun, I guess I should hope they do. But I've never understood how valuations so high can be supported given the relatively low barriers to entry (relative to multi-billion dollar valuations). I'd define myself as soft skeptic - I acknowledge I could be wrong and undervaluing first-mover advantage. I just don't understand how or why.
I'm back, and forgive me if we're going in circles here, but I still am confident in my assertion. Is there something specific that you know that the general public does not?
It is fine. I don't want to feed ignorance here. It is pretty clear you have no idea what Tezos is and haven't done any bit of cursory research on it. And, to folks like you, my only advise is to wait and watch for the token to be released and then you will witness how it competes with Eth ecosystem.
It is not an attack. I just don't want to spend my educating folks who aren't willing to help themselves. Just read their whitepaper or any of the 100s of youtube videos on tezos and you will discover that it is a full fledged Ethereum competitor.
While there are surely FOMO investors in any ICO, there's a really rational case for Tezos. It potentially solves the governance issues bitcoin had as well as offering provable smart contracts, which helps alleviate the constantly-hacked problem with ethereum smart contracts. In terms of the amount raised, I invested because the coldly rational math of what a market-cap competitive with wither of those would mean for the token value gave really great pot-odds to a "donation."
This was the first project I ever saw where the developer pitched the source code to hacker news fore review, rather than a whitepaper to a coin sale.
This is fantastic news. I think there is definite potential in both the token itself (given that it holds about a billion dollars now) and in the language backing it.
Since ads sometimes carry malware, disabling them is just self defense.
Paywalls are marginally sensible for really major publishers, but not that sensible because we're in an environment where we consume articles individually from lots of different sources.
Micropayments per article could work if enough of the article is available for free so I can decide whether it's worth paying a tiny bit to read the rest. To get halfway back to the original topic, maybe cryptocurrency could help with that.
Then don't read it? A payment model you don't like doesn't mean you still get to have the product. I don't like how some software has only annual licenses but I don't get to run it anyway because I don't think it's fair.
Your initial complaint is that the publisher should be allowed to make money. What difference does it make to you if someone reads without giving them ad revenue or doesn't read it at all?
What difference does anyone's behavior in the world make to you? If that's the question then nothing is worth discussing unless you're directly affected by it and really doesn't lead anywhere productive.
""" The Breitmans began Tezos, which is a software platform, four years ago in a bid to address some of the governance issues that have surrounded other cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin....
The ensuing dispute over control of the $232 million ... """