3d secure is a function to improve the security for credit cards for online usage (additional password). U have to contact your credit card issuer / your bank to unlock it and register properly.

I think most of the "unsafe" fake news and other false information, bullying, scams, child pornography, sexual predators, illegal content and offers are not necessarily coming from not-intelligent individuals or groups. I suppose that stuff like this coming from smart people is even more dangerous, since it's "packed" smarter and the danger behind is less evident.

On the other hand, if there would be less stupid people falling for all those mentioned traps, it would still make it safer in terms of there would be less of those successful activities. Clearly, this is not to manage with an IQ test imo.

There should be better training for everyone how to use the internet, how to asses the credibility of information and where the dangers and risks are and so on!

Some say intelligence is being book and street smart, what i like very much. Still, this definition does not really include some aspects of the working memory, logic reasoning or processing speed, which are in my opinion the "inner" or innate intelligence (still, it is possible to train those).

But you name it yourself, intelligence is problem solving skills (which is imo not limited to logical or mathematical reasoning). Besides the IQ, isn't someone intelligent, when he knows how to set up a strong and useful network and how to interact effectively with it?

Look at the Wechsler Test (WAIS), one of the most frequently used intelligence test, which well includes spatial and linguistic components! Those components (among others) are combined to a general intelligence, similar as spearman already described it a long time ago with his g-factor theory!

Redefine? Please give me the one definition of intelligence where everybody agrees on. As a said, there are many models and models are constructed. You can e.g. factor-analyse what specific criteria load on a central intelligence construct (e.g. spearmens g- and s- factor), there is not one clear definition of intelligence till now. Yes, there might be models which are more reliable and valid, which does not make other models completely obsolete.

E.g. Gartner postulated a multiple intelligence model, including musical / rhythmic and interpersonal intelligence. I know, those multiple factors do not clearly relate to one superior intelligence construct. And i give u that creativity is probably something different than intelligence, social intelligence though is very much a form of intelligence to me, although it's a non-academic measure.

In many intelligence test, comprehension, vocabulary and other verbal tasks are part of the test. Imo this clearly differs from other domains like processing speed, working memory, logical thinking and so on. It correlates still with a superior intelligence factor to a certain extent. But is it accurate to speak of a general intelligence mixing verbal skills and mathematic skills together? And the reliability of verbals tasks is also a bit limited and can depend heavily on the interviewer.

You will always have different subdomains, which you can measure more or less accurate. Those subdomains are somehow combined to an intelligence construct. What subdomains have to be within this intelligence construct will always be an approximation and is not as clear as it is what it is!

There are many models and definitions of intelligence. The IQ usually is measured in an academic form, regardless of the culture of the subjects being tested. Therefore we measure, what WE think intelligence is, bringing disadvantages for certain groups. Intelligence needs to be considered always with the context someone is in.

For me, intelligence is how to be smart and cognitively adaptable compared to others in the same surrounding and it should also include the emotional intelligence and creativity and other non-academic measures.

And how would you practically manage that only in-the-subject-educated voters can vote? And you don't see any interest conflicts when only property holders can vote? The world was not made for an elite, it is for everyone and it's hypocrite to think educated people vote for the best solution suitable for everyone (for the greater good for themselves). And what has the ownership of property to do with the decision if let's say cannabis should be legal or not?

Coming back to the beginning, how would you define educated concerning this question? We know that cannabis has many medicinal benefits but there are people prone to develop mental and other health issues, when smoking too much. Further there is a massive amount of "taxes" going to the black market instead of the state. Further the war on drugs is extremely costly and the money would be probably better invested in education of proper use. Sorry to go off-topic a bit, but you see the problem here, who is educated in such a complex question?

This is a question of opinions and attitudes, calculating pros an cons which are perceived differenty by everyone, but everyone should be able to express their feelings. So it's for the government or politicians to present us the facts as genuine as possible in a manner where everyone can understand the topic. We need better and more reliable facts and less propaganda and false promises, thats what we need.

And how do you define educated? You think it's fair, uneducated people are also part of this planet and should be heard or not? And officials will never protect the rights of citizens, they will always decide for whats most favorable for them! I begin to think that goverments should run on blockchain fully democratic within a framework, which ensures a basic law and regulation.

I think there should not be a fixed quota of how many women should be in the management, board and so on. The person who fits the best should be on the job.

The problem is, that in upper management jobs are dominated by men. And men have the tendencies to e.g. vote other men into a board, even if a woman would fit better.

There are lot of studies showing the positioning of a woman as a ceo helped enterprises to increase their revenue and decrease fluctuation and increase employee satisfaction in general, which is crucial nowadays imo. Holding on to your coworkers and keeping them happy is key for motivation and high quality products and services. Furthermore, women tend towards a more long-term orientation and less risky behavior, leading to a healthy and stable growth.

Social status (online) became the new definition of being successful. Other than the social status in the real world, the likes help to measure it "objectively" and make it easy to compare yourself with others. Usually, it should make you feel better if you earn a lot of likes, the problem is that most people compare themselves with "superior" individuals what decreases their well being and self-esteem.

In times like these, ICOs may attract investors with additional incentives. One possibility is via the distribution of unsold tokens to investors, to increase their relative share of tokens compared to the founders and the organization, which usually receive a fixed amount of tokens. This can be done via airdrop, not to confuse with airdropping a small amount of tokens to a community (almost) for free; see https://medium.com/@FundFantasy/unsold-tokens-keep-burn-or-airdrop-them-part-2-c2d9305f94e9.

When a certain hardcap is reached, there are no tokens left to distribute. But when only let's say the softcap is reached, one could reward investors, which believed in you, when others didn't. But you probably want to give a little extra and not the whole gap amount between soft and hardcap, since it decreases the relative share of the founders/organization and you're giving away shares for free. One possibility is for example to give away half the amount of the tokens which were sold in addition multiplied with  the percentage of unsold tokens.

Example: Softcap 5mio, Hardcap 50 mio:

- 5 mio reached: 2.5 mio x 90% = 2.25mio of the unsold tokens distributed to the investors according to their investment.
- 10 mio reached: 5 mio x 80% = 4 mio of unsold tokens distributed to investors.
...

This of course increases the (unnecessary) complexity and decreases the value of one token. The total value for the investors should be a little higher compared to burning all unsold tokens, since they get more tokens, but with less value. However, this could lead to a downward trend maybe?

The topic may not hold a substantial amount of relevance, i would still love to hear what you think about this idea though!

I was just trying to point out the discrepancy between caring so much about data abuse from a kyc, but using other services (yes, which have nothing to do with crypto) so blindly. And as u say, almost everybody use those services.


I totally agree, and I am not pro kyc per se, i just think an ICO has also the right to determine if they want to know who is investing in their project (irrespective of scams), especially if they establish their business in locations where it's already possible to act fully compliant with existing or new regulations.

I wonder how many of you with concerns about kyc (if you embrace the vision of bitcoin and its anonymity i fully understand) are shopping online, booking flights, are on social media, using wifis, register for certain services. Maybe people in this forum are not comparable to the rest of the world, but in general people don't really care about this subject. But scandals like the cambridge analytica are probably just the tip of the iceberg of data abuse. I am not even talking about scammers per se, i imagine that a lot of "legit" businesses are trading data, making money out of it, and don't give a crap about our privacy.  Although for me personally, full anonymity is not necessary, but a decision, i want to be in control of my data and decide who has access to it, and if someone wants to use my data they actually should pay me!

If an ICO wants to go more legit within the existing world and comply with certain authorities, you most certainly need to do a kyc. If you want to reach traditional investors, this is the way to go also to be tradable on upcoming security token exchanges such as Polymath GBX or tZERO. I think the development of blockchain goes quicker in finding a way between evolution and revolution, implement it in the existing world and get a bit away from the thoughts of max disruption.

Anonymity was most probably one of the core ideas of the bitcoin network, but chaos was maybe not. Imo a system needs to operate in a somehow regulated framework, there should not be any profiting third party though. I further understand the privacy concerns and fear of data abuse. This again, i think will clearly be a part of the future technology dominant world, and we need to have kind of a digital identity. Therefore, data and IT security have a huge relevance within this area where it's all about trust.

And why not? even if miracles happen, it is for the individual to decide if he believes in miracles or not.  But everyone should decide about his life for himself, ill or not! Even if you want to prevent those people from going to hell, we should interfere less with things which are non of our concern.

Point taken but let's be honest, addressing the root-problem isn't gonna happen soon, therefore it is still better to fight symptoms than don't do nothing. E.g. the energy sector, why not ban the construction of any non-renewable power plants? For now, it's about damage control in my opinion. But even if we exploit this planet to it's limit, there are still projects like the ocean cleanup, of course it's fighting symptoms, but still giving me hope. Changing human behavior and creating a more balanced and healthy world takes a lot of time. But small changes sometimes can have a huge impact https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q

Investment relatef the us would be an interesting market, but yes the sec‘s arrogance make me wanna puke. I think certain things need to be regulated, in a way smaller and entrepreneurial-friendly manner and with less emphasis on investors protection. Change will come faster, if they refuse to adapt they gonna miss out on pioneer roles. Even though the ICO market hs developed a little different than expected, it still drove innovation, helped on blockchain development and lets us identify the obstscles and chances working in this amazing time of technological development and possibly new world orders! Creating a more just world isnt maybe in the interest of the SEC though!

It JUST needs some immediate change on a veeery big scale

There is also the possibility to airdrop them (not talkin about giving away a little amount of tokens to the community). To maximize the investors value, unsold tokens can be distributed to them in relation to their investment. Since the founders and the team usually get a fixed amount of tokens, this increases their relative share.

https://medium.com/@FundFantasy/unsold-tokens-keep-burn-or-airdrop-them-part-2-c2d9305f94e9

of course it decreases the value for the founders and team, which is more pronounced when only a small part of the total amount of tokens is sold. One could complicate things and implement like a linear function and make it fair for both the investor and the founders and team? Should one party be rewarded to a greater extent? The ones taking the risk in times when trust in ICOs is low? Or the founders, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE FOUNDERS?

The internet nowadays mostly relies on servers, there are many and geographically distributed. But it does not really work decentralized since data are stored on one server for example. IPFS is a project trying to decentralize the internet and create a real p2p hypermedia protocol.

Otherwise i agree with your oxymoron reference. Still you need to define rules in what frame the system governs in a first place. However, decentralization at the world level in terms of governmental processes, this will probably be one of the last implementations of blockchain. States are sovereign and will in a first place introduce blockchain on national level (concerning governmental processes). Otherwise, blockchain will be applied internationally in other areas where loads of data exchange and transactions happen, such as supply chain management, financial functions, digital identities and the energy market.

Liechtenstein also is moving fast in terms of security tokens complying with the law. The just confirmed that the first real security token is launched under full approval of their financial market authority. This hopefully is a possibility to earn back some trust for serious projects after those many scams or shitty ideas.

https://www.naegele.law/archiv/prospekt-eines-ico-tge-eines-security-token-gebilligt