Post: #26

(09-18-2017 11:17 AM)Bill Brasky Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:19 PM)NewDayNewFace Wrote:  If you invested 3k into NEO in January you would be a millionaire now. So you definitely don't need to invest too much to get the big gains. If you do your due diligence on ICO you can make some serious money. ICO's like 0x and Kyber were no brainers to me.

Ray Carlton, if we knew the answers to your questions then all of us would be millionaires fairly soon. But realistically I expect to be a millionaire within a couple years. Crypto hasn't been adapted main stream yet. Once it does I expect Coin Market Cap to be in trillions.

So my advice to anyone here is home the majority of your investments into the main coins. Invest heavily into big ICO that you have done your due diligence in. Once they get on the exchanges sell your original investment in the ICO and put it back to the main coins.

For me my long term holds are LTC, OMG, Golem, 0x, Kyber, and of course BTC.

From my understanding, doesn't Kyber render 0x and even exchanges (centralized and decentralized) obsolete. The only reason I can see one holding 0x AND kyber is if kyber somehow can't deliver on what it says it will be able to do.

Currently, there are multiple successful exchanges. I believe both ideas from Kyber and 0x will be very successful. Even though they are somewhat similar there is room for growth for both. Below is a quote on the differences between the two.

Quote:Kyber and 0x are both high-profile ICOs that tackle similar problems, so we dedicate this section to do a comparison between Kyber and 0x.

Areas where Kyber is better:

Kyber’s idea, if implemented successfully, would create a better product than 0x. The features not available from 0x are listed below.
Guarantee liquidity: Users can always find a counterparty to settle their trades so they don’t need to worry about not being able to trade their cryptocurrency, no matter how illiquid the tokens are.
Instant transfer: Once users enter into a trade, they can receive the token that are being exchanged instantly. With the 0x protocol, unless you are the taker of the trade, you don’t know how long it takes until another party takes your order.
Kyber lets you pay a merchant with any tokens and the merchant would receive another cryptocurrency (for example, Ether) in return, eliminating the need to convert your tokens back to a more popular cryptocurrency before paying the merchant.

Areas where 0x is better:

0x has first mover advantage with many dApps and relayers using 0x as part of the component. Projects that partners with 0x include Ethfinex, Augur, District0x, Status, among others. You can see the list of dApps and relayers that adopt the 0x protocol.
Ethfinex is probably going to be the first functioning decentralized exchange that is actually good and widely used because its creator, Bitfinex, has extensive experience running one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges in the world. This is just one of the relayers built on top of 0x, demonstrating the potential of the 0x project.
Kyber is an exchange while 0x is a protocol where other dApps can use it as a component. All else equal, protocols are more valuable because different projects can be built on top of it.
Since both Kyber and the reserve operators need to make a profit, we imagine that the fees charged by Kyber (i.e. the bid/ask spread) would be higher than existing exchanges.
Having compared the two projects, Kyber is actually more similar to ShapeShift than 0x. Kyber is like a decentralized version of ShapeShift. ShapeShift charges higher fees than most exchanges because they take on the risk of being a market maker. Same thing goes for Kyber.

I'm holding coins for both and whether one succeeds it's always great to diversify the portfolio. Especially with these high value coins.

Post: #27

I get what you're saying but in the end-game of crypto, I seem to err on the side of "all or nothing" when it comes to which protocol for exchange of digital assets will reign supreme. I cannot see, at this moment how kyber could not control 100% of digital asset exchange if the goals of its white paper were to completely come to fruition.

I will say something a bit off-topic but also relevant. I follow Vitalik on twitter and he does have an SJW leaning disposition based on his posts. I don't fault the guy for it as it seems to just be the default mental-model for someone his age and in his industry and of his physical characteristics, 100% brain and 0% brawn. I bring this up because men of 0% brawn, however decent or truth-seeking they may be, always become easy targets for carrying out the will of globalism (centralization).

With Vitalik at the helm of kyber I can see it succumbing to the imperatives of centralization. If this is the case then other protocols, such as 0x may have a way in to be able to compete.

Post: #28

So you're saying rely solely on someone's name being attached to an ICO? Sorry this is not good enough for me to risk a $100k investment when I already have almost everything I want in life without rocking the boat.

Post: #29

^No I say you look at the team before you look at the idea of the project. The team will be the most important factor as anyone can have a good idea, it's who is going to deliver. Everything you invest in will be a risk.

That's fine if you don't want to invest. If your comfortable then why invest in a space that is volatile?

Post: #30

(09-17-2017 01:19 PM)NewDayNewFace Wrote:  If you invested 3k into NEO in January you would be a millionaire now. So you definitely don't need to invest too much to get the big gains. If you do your due diligence on ICO you can make some serious money. ICO's like 0x and Kyber were no brainers to me.

Ray Carlton, if we knew the answers to your questions then all of us would be millionaires fairly soon. But realistically I expect to be a millionaire within a couple years. Crypto hasn't been adapted main stream yet. Once it does I expect Coin Market Cap to be in trillions.

So my advice to anyone here is home the majority of your investments into the main coins. Invest heavily into big ICO that you have done your due diligence in. Once they get on the exchanges sell your original investment in the ICO and put it back to the main coins.

For me my long term holds are LTC, OMG, Golem, 0x, Kyber, and of course BTC.

People just should realize that we are probably in a bubble and you could loose a big chunk of your investment. Blockchain just does not scale and has no use cases but speculation and mining. Period.

Post: #31

(09-19-2017 10:00 AM)semibaron Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:19 PM)NewDayNewFace Wrote:  If you invested 3k into NEO in January you would be a millionaire now. So you definitely don't need to invest too much to get the big gains. If you do your due diligence on ICO you can make some serious money. ICO's like 0x and Kyber were no brainers to me.

Ray Carlton, if we knew the answers to your questions then all of us would be millionaires fairly soon. But realistically I expect to be a millionaire within a couple years. Crypto hasn't been adapted main stream yet. Once it does I expect Coin Market Cap to be in trillions.

So my advice to anyone here is home the majority of your investments into the main coins. Invest heavily into big ICO that you have done your due diligence in. Once they get on the exchanges sell your original investment in the ICO and put it back to the main coins.

For me my long term holds are LTC, OMG, Golem, 0x, Kyber, and of course BTC.

People just should realize that we are probably in a bubble and you could loose a big chunk of your investment. Blockchain just does not scale and has no use cases but speculation and mining. Period.

Has no use cases?

Sure, that's why each significant bank on the planet is working on it.

Post: #32

(09-19-2017 11:28 AM)Ray Carlton Wrote:  

(09-19-2017 10:00 AM)semibaron Wrote:  

(09-17-2017 01:19 PM)NewDayNewFace Wrote:  If you invested 3k into NEO in January you would be a millionaire now. So you definitely don't need to invest too much to get the big gains. If you do your due diligence on ICO you can make some serious money. ICO's like 0x and Kyber were no brainers to me.

Ray Carlton, if we knew the answers to your questions then all of us would be millionaires fairly soon. But realistically I expect to be a millionaire within a couple years. Crypto hasn't been adapted main stream yet. Once it does I expect Coin Market Cap to be in trillions.

So my advice to anyone here is home the majority of your investments into the main coins. Invest heavily into big ICO that you have done your due diligence in. Once they get on the exchanges sell your original investment in the ICO and put it back to the main coins.

For me my long term holds are LTC, OMG, Golem, 0x, Kyber, and of course BTC.

People just should realize that we are probably in a bubble and you could loose a big chunk of your investment. Blockchain just does not scale and has no use cases but speculation and mining. Period.

Has no use cases?

Sure, that's why each significant bank on the planet is working on it.

The technology has use cases. However, non of the existing coins has right now. Look at Ethereum. Corporations rather build custom blockchains than use the original Ethereum Blockchain.

Post: #33

You said "blockchain just does not scale and has no use cases" but then you switch it up and say the technology has uses. I don't think you are well informed buddy.

Post: #34

(09-14-2017 06:57 PM)Travel Museums Wrote:  Maybe drawing a modest yearly return and living a decent life off it is better. But how? There are some passive ETF, dividend schemes, etc. starting to come into crypto. Has anyone explored a formula?

Buy coins that allow you to stake or have masternode components. Use the proceeds like dividends. That's passive.

Post: #35

(09-19-2017 07:15 PM)semibaron Wrote:  The technology has use cases. However, non of the existing coins has right now. Look at Ethereum. Corporations rather build custom blockchains than use the original Ethereum Blockchain.

This is a legitimate concern, but weren't you just shilling IOTA not that long ago on the theory that this wouldn't happen?

Post: #36

(09-19-2017 11:37 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(09-19-2017 07:15 PM)semibaron Wrote:  The technology has use cases. However, non of the existing coins has right now. Look at Ethereum. Corporations rather build custom blockchains than use the original Ethereum Blockchain.

This is a legitimate concern, but weren't you just shilling IOTA not that long ago on the theory that this wouldn't happen?

I'm heavily invested in IOTA. Just want to point out that it actually is a very risky investment and am aware that I could also loose a big chunk of it.

Although I think IOTA is far superior to the other coins and may actually have a chance to be used one day in the real world, the crypto market is heavily interconnected. Hence when Bitcoin or Ethereum fail, IOTA will fail as well.

Post: #37

I don't want to be a dick, but since actual money is on the line here, I'll say I would be super cautious about taking long-term investment advice from anybody who's heavily invested into IOTA. That thing is kind of junk. It's not the WORST buy in crypto right now, but it's somewhere in the bottom 20% of the high volume coins (Not gonna count shit like HTMLCoin, ArticCoin, INSN, NMR, or stuff like that, there's a whole universe of terrible cryptos out there.). IOTA is like BANCOR/Stratis level bad.

If you really want a passive income look for a masternode or proof of stake coin you like, do a ton of research until you're satisfied that it will do very well, and shell out for a node or enough to make the 8% or 10% a year you'll get running proof of stake profitable. There are no masternode based coins, with the POSSIBLE exception of Pivx (which is currently 33k for a node and returns $4 a day, YOWCH, but if PIVX goes up in value 10 times, becomes a better proposition) that I think are suitable for long-term holding at current prices, but maybe you'll find one you think makes sense. Of proof of Stake coins, PART is very good, and a good buy regardless, but I'm struggling to think of any others. Maybe ETH or ARK... Maybe.

In general, crypto is volatile and speculative enough that you should be aiming for quick turnarounds rather than long term holds. Anybody who tells you they know what the market will look like for alt-coins in a year is a liar. I expect a giant shakeout and a lot of flattened demand for things, along with a bunch of dead projects, but I don't know.

Quote:For me my long term holds are LTC, OMG, Golem, 0x, Kyber, and of course BTC.

Decent choices, though the massive proliferation of exchange-based tokens makes me leery about buying into any of them. I've used blockchain based exchanges like Waves and it's not an experience I would care to repeat.

Post: #38

I'm on the fence about buying ARK. Maybe if it goes below $3...

Post: #39

(09-20-2017 03:25 AM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  I don't want to be a dick, but since actual money is on the line here, I'll say I would be super cautious about taking long-term investment advice from anybody who's heavily invested into IOTA. That thing is kind of junk. It's not the WORST buy in crypto right now, but it's somewhere in the bottom 20% of the high volume coins (Not gonna count shit like HTMLCoin, ArticCoin, INSN, NMR, or stuff like that, there's a whole universe of terrible cryptos out there.). IOTA is like BANCOR/Stratis level bad.

Interesting opinion, could you elaborate on this a bit more? However, best in the appropriate thread.

Post: #40

It's funny but true that Vitalik's name alone as an advisor to Kyber has completely legitimised it in the eyes of speculators. It was the same with OmiseGO. For this reason alone kyber is a safe play - you won't lose money. Kyber further extends on the Ethereum blockchain with infrastructure, I just think DEX is getting a bit redundant and it has its competitors. I only ignored it because of chainlink which is a first-mover tech that builds on top of legacy banking tech.

I'm so sick of seeing redundant projects which seem like copy-pastes of the previous one. The storage coin, the index fund coin, the privacy coin, gambler coin, the Ethereum killer. More and more it is starting to look like Ethereum is getting infrastructure build around it and everyone is starting at a huge setback. With all the upgrades Ethereum is getting, it might make many coins completely redundant and useless. Who will want to buy a privacy coin if Ethereum already has zsnarks? Who will want a Ethereum killer like NEO or tezos when ETH already has the biggest network and best infrastructure? Pretty soon these new ICOs are not going to even turn a profit or sell out. This might be the beginning of the ICO bubble popping.

Post: #41

(09-21-2017 08:07 AM)[email protected] Wrote:  It's funny but true that Vitalik's name alone as an advisor to Kyber has completely legitimised it in the eyes of speculators. It was the same with OmiseGO. For this reason alone kyber is a safe play - you won't lose money. Kyber further extends on the Ethereum blockchain with infrastructure, I just think DEX is getting a bit redundant and it has its competitors. I only ignored it because of chainlink which is a first-mover tech that builds on top of legacy banking tech.

I'm so sick of seeing redundant projects which seem like copy-pastes of the previous one. The storage coin, the index fund coin, the privacy coin, gambler coin, the Ethereum killer. More and more it is starting to look like Ethereum is getting infrastructure build around it and everyone is starting at a huge setback. With all the upgrades Ethereum is getting, it might make many coins completely redundant and useless. Who will want to buy a privacy coin if Ethereum already has zsnarks? Who will want a Ethereum killer like NEO or tezos when ETH already has the biggest network and best infrastructure? Pretty soon these new ICOs are not going to even turn a profit or sell out. This might be the beginning of the ICO bubble popping.

Very true. I think in the future (whenever this will be) only a handful first-class projects will survive.