Quote from: tempus on April 19, 2016, 05:26:24 PM

Quote from: mxhwr on April 19, 2016, 03:34:15 PM

Quote from: rtrtcrypto on April 19, 2016, 03:29:35 PM

I'm semi concerned about that too. But, I'm much more interested in seeing the project attempt to work through all of this and develop something meaningful. Further, I'm also really interested in seeing a roadmap and team update/tech update on the plans for the millions of dollars - what devs are being hired? What's the plan? Where is this going in the vision of the team in place currently.

Right now there is not much brain power focused towards LISK - reading through this thread shows that 99% of the people here just want absurdly crazy ROI at any cost. Very little talk is about development or use cases almost all of it is just plain "moon for moon's sake".

Curious to see what substance the team can put together for 5 million bucks.

Quote from: wasref on April 19, 2016, 03:19:32 PM

How funny LISK don't even have DAPPS javascript is not compatiable and this aint even FUD amazing the only real fud they have against ethereum is that solidity language they're using is not popular

there is a reason why vitalik didnt use JS for the back end because it wont work for their plan lisk can be coded to play games like hangman, free candy crusher or flipper remember FUN APPS not fun dapps

if you ask me they hyped up the coin for something they dont have

$5.9million for 1 year work nice wage maan

if you ask me rtcrypto how did they raise all that. i wasnt here from the start so dont really want to go back 600 pages but did they have some marketing campaign going on how did they hype all this to raise so much. well as a trader i'm not happy i never bought as a investor/developer happy i didn't. i couldn't buy this at ICO price if i had the chance without seeing what they have planned and seeing through their double meanings

I can't speak for anybody else, but I can tell you exactly why I bought into the ICO:

1. My first impression was that they are pretty good and really smart in marketing. While that can be a red flag if we think about shady projects it's a huge pro in serious and legit projects. Because it needs the ability to raise attention, not just to attract Investors but also Developers.

2. The team: Because I could not know if they are serious or shady I've read interviews and posts and then I was 100% sure that they are serious about this, that they will do all they can to make it successful. Of course, that doesn't say much about their abilities to do it, but in general my impression was and still is: It all is very thought out.

3. Regarding the tech: I'm not a tech guy but I think a lot about the natural conflicts between centralization and decentralization and my own theory is: It's not possible to be effective and totally decentralized at the same time. I believe that the best way is to have a decentralized core-Blockchain, simple and stable, but centralized applications that just anchor in the core chain. If you take Bitcoin for example: It's possible and not too hard to build on top of it. And many projects do that, like Factom for example which I know best. Multiple projects, some with their own blockchain and some without can do this without bloating the Bitcoin-Blockchain but securing itself in it, benefit from the huge security of the Bitcoin-Blockchain. The thing about it is: Some of those projects can fail, some can succeed, it won't ever hurt the Core. And: The economy stays decentralized because it's not just one economy. Ethereum does it the other way around. It's all on the blockchain, the tech can mess up because in my eyes it's overcomplex, it's one big economy and with the PoS-model they will switch to, I believe that even if the tech should work, the economy will lead into a centralizing effect. That's why I prefer projects that keep it simple at the core while making it possible to grow beyond itself.

Regarding node.js: I've asked a friend of mine who is a skilled Dev and under the line he said nearly exactly what Max said in this reply: http://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/2104/how-does-lisk-differ-from-ethereum/3176#3176

That it's all about how skilled they are with it. My hope is that they will hire more good Devs and then: If the core will be stable I don't see much reason to believe this project will fail. Dapps can fail in many ways but that won't hurt the potential of Lisk.

4. Crypti: I didn't even know about it. But while the fork is something that was criticized a lot I see a huge pro in it. The reason is simple: Crypti obviously worked well regarding the tech. At least I don't have other informations. It was just totally under the radar and the best projects will die without attention. So I also see a pro in the strategy to do exactly that (marketing) better with Lisk and obviously they know how to do it.

5. Usecases: Will Lisk be a project for the big companies, like banks and so on? I don't expect that. But if we think about the gaming sector, just for example, it can be big business and big money. And there are a lot of other use cases that have the potential to be part of a growing "Lisk-economy". It will be all about attracting Developers.

6. Conclusion: Is Lisk a safe bet? No. There is not a single project that is safe. We are in a high-risk-market. But if the core will be stable, if they attract and/or hire skilled Developers, I believe to see a lot of potential. And while it may be the complexity that could kill other projects, the simplicity of Lisk could turn out as big strength. That's really the main-reason why I bought into the ICO.

agree 1000%