本文翻译自：https://medium.com/@dennyk/why-and-how-the-cryptobubble-will-burst-de9bc7fc5332
翻译时间：2017-11-10
For someone who has lived through the .com bubble the madness currently unfolding in the crypto space is just plain breathtaking. It is quite awe inspiring to see people make the exact same mistakes they made 17 years ago. Of course, today’s investors are likely different people who, for the most part, have not lived through the .com bubble.
对于曾经经历过.com泡沫的人来说，目前在加密世界中展现的疯狂是令人惊奇的。十七年前的错误，今天又重复了。当然，今天的投资者可能跟以前的不同，他们大部分都没有经历过.com泡沫。
Those of you who are looking to read more about the topic or learn some basics about cryptoassets can check the end of this blog post, where I am simply collecting some interesting links that I believe are worth a look.
那些想要阅读更多关于这个问题的人或者学习一些关于加密资产基础知识的人可以看下博客文章的结尾，在那里我简单地收集了一些认为值得一看的有趣链接。
I need to establish some basic definitions. To me, there are three different kinds of Cryptoassets:
首先，我需要建立一些基本的定义。对我来说，有三种不同的加密资产：
a) Cryptocurrencies := Cryptoassets that are mainly used to store value, speculate or transact on the blockchain. Examples are Bitcoin, Litecoin and Dash as well as ZCash.
b) Platforms or true Utility token := Cryptoasstets that enable decentralized applications (DApps) or enable other token to trade on their blockchain. Examples would include Ethereum, Lisk, Blockstack or Tezos (when they launch)
c) Security token := any and all ICOs that are sold to investors so that they can speculate on the progress of a start up. This would include TenX, Monaco, Status and Iconomi amongst a host of others.
a）加密货币: 主要用于存储价值的加密资产，可在区块链上投机或交易。比如比特币，Litecoin 和 Dash 以及 ZCash。
b）平台的或真正的实用代币: 能够使去中心化应用程序（DApps）运行的加密资产，或能使其他代币在它们的块链上交易的加密资产。如 Ethereum，Lisk，Blockstack 或 Tezos（当它们启动运行时）
c）证券代币: 所有通过 ICO 出售给投资者的代币，并通过这样的方式来推动项目启动进度。如 TenX，Monaco、Status 和 Iconomi 等等。
Back in 1999 and 2000 the stock market went crazy about anything related to the internet. These are the parallels to today:
回到1999年和2000年，任何跟互联网相关的股票开始疯狂涨起来。这与今天的情况有很多相似之处：
In the late nineties and early 2000s there was an IPO (initial public offering) boom. The Nasdaq was driving new highs every day and new public companies would list there or on any of the “New” or “Tech” market segments established by other stock exchanges. If you took part in the bookbuilding process and bid for stock during the IPO, you were often able to double your money on day one of trading. Everyone was taking part — institutions, high net worth investors and your local retail guy who worked at Walmart or drove a cab. As a matter of fact cab drivers handed out tips of the next hot IPO to their riders. Most IPOs only needed a business idea that was vaguely related to the internet to achieve success.
在九十年代末和二十一世纪初，IPO（首次公开募股）开始繁荣起来。纳斯达克市场每天上涨新高，新上市公司不断在这里或在其它证券交易所建立的“新”或“技术”细分市场上上市。如果您在 IPO 期间参与了股票的询价申购，那么交易一天您通常就可能将您的资金翻倍。几乎所有人都参与了这个盛会，不管是高净值投资者还是在沃尔玛工作或驾驶出租车的当地零售商。事实上，出租车司机还会向他们的顾客提供了下一个热门 IPO 的服务。大多数首次公开发行的公司只需要一个与互联网模糊相关的经营理念就能取得成功。
Today this is very much the same story in ICO world. It appears everyone has taken part in an ICO or a pre-sale of some random token that promises to use the blockchain to deliver your local groceries or some other ridiculous idea that could potentially benefit from a Dapp but certainly does not need a token to work.
Some of these ICOs, especially in early 2017 have indeed 10x the money of people who invested, which has fueled the boom. Note that the list of non-scam ICOs (looking at you, Veritaseum and not because you are legit…) that have actually done well for their buyers in Bitcoin terms (not in US Dollar terms) is quite short. The one difference today is that the token, most of which are using the Ethereum blockchain to trade, have absolutely no ownership rights. But that is a point I will come to later. For now, let’s just remember that the ICO mania mirrors the IPO mania nearly two decades ago.
今天，同样的故事在 ICO 世界里上演。看起来每个人都似乎参投了一些 ICO 或它的预售，这些项目承诺使用区块链技术来交付你的杂货业务，或者使用其他可能从 Dapp (去中心化应用)中受益的荒谬的想法，这些项目其实根本不需要使用代币。其中一些ICO，尤其是在2017年初，投资者获得了10倍的收益，这引起了投资热潮。请注意，以比特币的数字形式(而不是用美元)并且为买家确实做得很好的非诈骗 ICO 项目(想想 Veritaseum 项目，并不因为你是合法的) 很少。今天的一个区别是，大多数使用以太坊区块链进行交易的代币绝对没有(项目)所有权。这是我稍后会谈到的一点。我们只要记住，现在 ICO 的疯狂如同镜子一样反映了20年前的IPO疯狂。
In the .com bubble existing technology firms listed on the Nasdaq sometimes decided to add “.com” to their company name and saw their shares surge, sometimes 30–50%.
Well, guess what is happening now… There have already been a handful of companies that simply added “Blockchain” to their company name. Note that this is just a name change in many cases… And of course their value has soared just because of that.
在.com泡沫时代，现有的科技公司在纳斯达克上市时决定增加“.com”的公司名称，就会看到他们的股票有30-50％涨幅。
那么，猜猜现在发生了什么......已经有一些公司只是在他们的公司名称中添加了“区块链”。请注意，在许多情况下，这仅仅是一个名称改变...然而，却因为如此，它们的价值大幅上涨。
During the .com bubble, the major problem for analysts and investors was that most of the companies had losses and not profits, so there was hardly anything to value them on. Traditionally, things like Free Cash Flow yield, EV/EBITDA and P/E multiples or DCF analysis are being used to value equities. The problem with all these methods is that if profits are forecast to be negative for a substantial period of time or very tiny in relation to market cap, the ratios do not make sense and DCF will rely mostly on the “terminal value”, which is an assumed value in perpetuity based on profits 10 or 20 years out. As none of these methods made sense (not because they did not work, but because the shares traded at ridiculous levels), analysts thought up new methods to value internet stocks. This went so far that the oft-read standard volume “Valuation” added an entire chapter on the valuation of internet stocks that was later taken out again as it was obvious bogus.
在.com泡沫期间，分析师和投资者面临的主要问题是大多数公司都亏损而没有利润，所以几乎没有什么可以用来估值的方法。传统上，自由现金流收益率，EV/EBITDA 和 P/E 倍数或 DCF (贴现现金流法)分析被用于评估股票价值。但是所有这些方法的存在的问题是，如果预测利润在相当长的一段时间内是负的或者与市值相关度很小，那么这个比率就没有意义了，DCF 将主要依赖于“终端价值”，这是基于利润10年或20年的永久假定值。所以这些方法都没有意义（不是因为他们无效，而是因为股票在荒谬的水平上交易），后来分析师想出了新的方法来评估互联网公司股票。并且在经常阅读的标准卷“估值”一章增加了对整个网络股票进行估值的内容，但是因为这个方法明显无效，之后又删除了。
Fast forward to today — the same is happening again. While I want to be clear that there are important differences in that Bitcoin does have some sort of a value as a “store of value”, people making up new ideas like network value for token (not so much for Bitcoin) just makes no sense. Analysts and investors alike are ignoring valuation methods and seem to be fine with projects that offer nothing in return to carry “kick starter” valuations of 100m USD+
快进到今天 - 同样的情况再次发生。虽然我想清楚地指出，两者是有重要的区别，比特币具有某种“价值储存”的价值，而代币(不是比特币)却是毫无意义的，只是人们编造的一些网络价值这类的新的想法。分析师和投资者都忽视了估值方法。即使没有任何回报，却有着1亿美元估值的“kickstarter”项目，也不会当它存在什么问题。
Some worrying differences of the blockchain bubble and the .com bubble
** 一些令人担忧的区块链泡沫和.com泡沫的差异**
While there are obviously worrying parallels between the two bubbles, there are even more worrying differences.
虽然两个泡沫之间有明显令人担忧的相似之处，但更令人担忧的是它们的差异。
While during the .com bubble at least people were receiving actual equity for their hard-earned cash, when they invest in most ICOs (the ones of the security token type above) they receive no rights in return. Let me stress this: they receive NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING of any value. They are invested in hot air. This is especially true for those ICOs that offer a product or service that does not really need a token. Let that sink in for a minute: because someone said “blockchain” you have bought hot air off a person that you do not know in the hope that someone else will buy it from you for a higher price. The only thing that helps you is the “greater fool theory” (if you do not know what that is, it is probably you).
在.com泡沫期间，至少人们使用辛苦赚来的现金获得了实际股权，当他们投资大多数 ICO（上面所说的证券代币类型）时，他们却没有获得任何回报的权利。让我强调这一点：他们收到的 NADA，ZILCH，没有任何价值。他们是在对热空气进行投资。对于那些所提供产品或服务并不需要使用代币的 ICO 来说尤其如此。让我们思考一下：因为有人说“区块链”，你从一个你不知道的人那里买了热空气，希望别人能以更高的价格从你这里购买。这里唯一可以帮助你的是“大傻瓜理论”（如果你不知道这是什么，那就是你的问题）。
I have written about this before. Market cap is defined as the value of all (ALL) shares outstanding in equities.
However, if you look at coinmarketcap.com, the “go-to” site for crypto market caps, you will notice that they only count the “Circulating Supply”, which is generally the amount of coins NOT held by team members of the firms that are selling them. In other words, they are showing only “free float” market cap if you were to compare it to equities.
我以前写过这个。市值是所有（全部）净发股票股份的价值。
然而，如果你看一看加密市场的市值网站 coinmarketcap.com，你会注意到他们只计算“Circulating Supply”，
其代币数量并不包括由出售它们的公司的团队成员持有的数量。换句话说，如果你把它与股票进行比较，它们只能显示“自由流通”市值。
Think about it — when you say Project XYZ is “only” worth 100m USD on coinmarket cap, it should be at least 200m (which is already crazy), you are probably ignoring about 50% of the token held by the founders of the project. These can be sold too… So not only are the valuations of 100m USD and more for hot air, these are not even the full story.
Coinmarketcap.com, by the way, used to have a feature to show “Total market Cap”, which they have conveniently dropped from the site.
想一想 - 当你说XYZ项目在数字货币市场上的价值只有1亿美元时，它其实至少应该是200m（这已经很疯狂了），你可能会忽略项目创始人持有的大约50％ 。这些当然也可以卖出去......所以，只是对于1亿美元以上的热空气进行估价，这并不完整。
顺便说一下，Coinmarketcap.com 曾经有一个功能来显示“总市值”，但现在已经没有了。
In equity markets, of course there are occasional scams and there were IPOs that turned out to be founded on not much more than a pyramid scheme. However, looking at crypto ICOs, the sheer amount of obvious scams is breathtaking.
Projects such as Veritaseum, Monkey Capital or WCX all reek of pyramid schemes, scammers and unprofessional conduct. While WCX still has a chance to turn out differently (as the ICO is not over yet, but things look quite spooky with no team members public and the nominated escrow for the money confirming that he holds no coins in escrow), the other two by now are confirmed scams (as for VERI, check the links below, as for Monkey do the same). This is truly terrible as it combines the worst of no regulation, internet anonymity and greed.
在股市中，当然也有偶然的诈骗活动，而且有些IPO被发现基于传销机构成立。然而，基于区块链数字货币的 ICO，有着惊人的大量的明显的骗局。
像 Veritaseum，Monkey Capital 或 WCX 等项目都是类似传销，骗子式的和不专业的。虽然 WCX 仍然还有机会证明自己（因为ICO还没有结束，但事情看起来相当吓人，团队没有公开和提名的第三方资金托管），另外两个现在已经被确认为诈骗（VERI，可以查看下面的链接）。这才是真正可怕的，因为 ICO 是最严重的不规范，互联网匿名和贪婪的结合体。
While the .com bubble had its fair share of retail investors, the main driver were the institutions. In the crypto bubble, the field is made up almost exclusively of newcomer retail investors that probably have never held a stock in their life. This is the reason why things like technical analysis work much better in crypto than in equities, because these markets are quite obviously more likely to be driven by fear and greed than established markets. TA is only a way to structure analysis of fear and greed after all.
虽然.com泡沫公司占据了散户投资者的份额，但主要驱动因素是机构。在加密货币泡沫领域，这个领域几乎完全由新手散户投资者组成，他们可能从来没有持有过一笔股票。这就是为什么技术分析用在加密货币方面比在股票方面更为有效的原因，因为这些市场显然比成熟的市场更容易被恐惧和贪婪所驱动。 这是对恐惧和贪婪进行分析的一种方式。
What I am really getting at here though is that most of these people have no experience whatsoever with losing money in investments. When the bubble bursts all of them will be headed for the exit at the same exact time. Furthermore they lack the skills of recognizing that we are in a bubble and that they are invested in hot air. If anything like that is suggested in any of the numerous slack or telegram channels of any of the hot air projects, whoever posted it directly gets blocked in the channel or showered with “this is FUD” accusations (fear uncertainty doubt, a crypto acronym that is supposed to say “this is just fearmongering, if you just hold your investments you will do great”).
我真正在这里要提到的是，这些人大部分都没有任何投资损失的经验。当泡沫破灭时，所有人都将在同一时间退出。而且他们非常缺乏，认识到我们正处在泡沫中的技能，没有意识到他们正投资于空气。如果有任何类似的建议在 slack 或 telegram 电报群中被提出，那么直接发布它的人将被禁言，或者被指责为“这是FUD”（FUD 即害怕不确定性怀疑的英文首写字母，用来说明“这只是恐惧，如果你只是持有你的投资，你会做得很好”）。
Little do all these people suspect that the only reason they are not already crying is that their invested security token have only lost value in bitcoin terms but held stable or only lost a little in USD terms. However, if you look at any chart of any security token vs bitcoin, you can quite clearly see that the only thing these are good for are short “pump and dumps”. After a pump they ALWAYS dump to a lower level. Now imagine what happens if Bitcoin ever falls again…
所有这些人都没有想到，他们还没有哭的唯一原因是他们的投资只在比特币方面失去了价值，或者只是在美元方面损失了一点点。但是，如果你查看任何证券代币和比特币的图表，你可以很清楚地看到，代币唯一在行的就是短暂的“暴涨和暴跌”。暴涨后，它们总是跌到一个较低的水平。现在想象一下如果比特币再次跌倒会发生什么...
It is quite obvious that all governments have been surprised by the ICO boom. Therefore regulation in the space is scarce, inconsistent and unclear. Not only does this give rise to the scams mentioned above, but also consider the following:
很明显，所有政府都对ICO的热潮感到惊讶。因此，在这个空间中的监管是稀缺的，不一致的和不明确的。这不仅会引起上面提到的诈骗，还请考虑以下几点：
a) as long as token are not clearly classified as securities wash trading, insider trading, spoofing and literally any kind of negative market conduct is not specifically outlawed. It might be seen as legal by the people who engage in it and of course it is extremely easy to do for those involved in a project or having gained a following in social media.
a）只要代币发行没有被明确分类为证券交易，内幕交易，欺骗和任何形式的负面市场行为都是不会被专门取缔的。从事这项工作的人和显而易见的对于参与项目的人或者在社交媒体上获得关注的人来说，可能会被视为合法。
b) most token actually fit the definition of a security by the SEC. Note that to be a security, a token needs to EITHER offer security-like rights (dividends, share of profit, voting rights) OR be offered to people who buy it in the expectation to sell it for a higher price later. Practically, if the token gets listed on an exchange and that is part of the ICO promise then it is a security. Most people do not want to understand that the second part of this definition currently covers ALL (all…) ICOs. Rightly, securities need to follow certain regulations before they can be sold and investors need to be educated.
b）大多数的代币发行实际上符合证券交易委员会对证券的定义。请注意，作为一种证券，代币需要提供类似股票的权利（股息，利润分享，投票权），或者提供给购买它的人以期望以后以更高的价格出售。实际上，如果代币在交易所上市并且是 ICO 承诺的一部分，那么这是一种证券。大多数人不明白，这个定义的第二部分目前涵盖所有的 ICO 。正确的说，证券需要遵循一定的规定才能出售，投资者需要接受教育。
c) the Cryptoworld seems to think it is immune to regulation in the future. This is a mistake. The moment a government like the US or the EU attaches a prison sentence to trading securities that are not properly following regulations (hint), to selling these securities or even owning them, watch law abiding citizens flee crypto. Of course Bitcoin won’t disappear, but it also won’t be trading at 6000 USD or more… Instead crypto should welcome regulation. It solves a lot of problems, ethical and otherwise. Note also that currently the biggest exchanges are actually located in the US with people who have addresses and lives running them. These are not immune to regulation.
c）加密世界似乎认为它对将来的监管是免疫的。这是一个错误。当美国和欧盟这样的政府对监管不力的证券交易进行监管，以及出售这些证券甚至拥有这些证券的时候，遵守法律的公民就会从加密码货币世界逃跑。当然比特币不会消失，但是不会在6000美元或更高的价格...相反，加密世界应该欢迎监管。监管解决了很多道德和其他问题。还要注意的是，目前最大的交易所实际上位于美国，管理人在美国居住并生活。这些对监管肯定不是免疫的。
I believe that there is currently a massive bubble going on in the space of “security token” defined above. This bubble somewhat extends to “utility token” and “cryptocurrencies” as well, but it is clearly home in the ICO space.
我相信目前上面定义的“证券代币”空间中正在出现一个巨大的泡沫。这个泡沫也有些扩展到“实用代币”和“加密货币”，但它显然是 ICO 领域的家园。
The likeliest scenario is that the two elephants in the room (US, EU) issue some sort of regulatory framework for ICOs and cryptoassets in general. I expect them to distinguish between pure network token or cryptocurrencies (which will likely include Bitcoin, Ethereum and some others) and security token. Almost all of the existing ICO space will firmly fall under the security token regulations.
最有可能的情景是，房间里的两头大象（美国，欧盟）总体上为 ICO 和加密资产出具了某种监管框架。我期望他们区分纯粹的网络代币或加密货币（可能包括比特币，以太坊等等）和证券代币。几乎所有现有的 ICO 空间都将牢牢地置于证券代币规定之下。
As a result, all major exchanges that have any kind of human owners, developers or known actors will be mandated to de-list all of these security token with immediate effect and they will follow this order. As for decentralized exchanges, given the trade in these token will be illegal and the projects that sold them might well have to refund investors, I am not so sure these are the way out that solves everything. I actually hope they aren’t because regulatory certainty is a positive, not a negative.
因此，主要交易所，拥有任何形式的持有者，开发者或已知投资人，都将被要求立即将所有这些证券代币从列表中删除。交易所将不得不遵循这个命令。对于去中心化的交易所，鉴于这种交易是非法的，项目卖出的代币可能不得不退还给投资者，我不敢肯定这是解决所有问题的出路。我实际上希望不是，因为监管是起到积极作用，而不是消极的。
When this happens, all ICOs will lose 90%+ of their value (just like during the .com bubble…) regardless of the strength of their projects. I keep bringing this up, but Amazon fell to 5.5 USD / share in 2001. It now trades at 1000 USD+. So also the good projects will fall 80–90%…
当这种情况发生时，不管项目的实力如何，所有的 ICO 都将损失90％的价值（就像.com泡沫期间一样）。我不断提出这一点，亚马逊在2001年下降到5.5美元/股，现在价格在1000美元以上。所以好项目也会下跌 80-90％...
At the same time the utility token related to the ICO boom will probably crash in tandem (after potentially spiking as most people first sell their security token for utility token and then for bitcoin and then for fiat), but possibly not as deep and they will recover in time. Most of these are valuable technologies that nobody wants to harm in the long term. Cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin will also be impacted, but I would expect an almost V-shaped recovery there as the listing of futures on the major exchanges, the formation of ETFs and more regulatory certainty will undoubtedly introduce institutional money to the space and more than 90% of that will flow into Bitcoin. Make no mistake though, Bitcoin will also suffer.
与此同时，与 ICO 热潮相关的实用代币可能会同时崩溃（因为大多数人首先出售他们的证券代币，然后是比特币，然后是法币），但价格可能跌得不会很深，并且能及时恢复。这其中大多数是有价值的技术，没有人愿意长期损失。像比特币这样的加密货币也会受到影响，但我预计在主要交易所上市的将会出现几乎 V 形的复苏，ETF的形成以及更多的监管无疑会引入机构资金到这个空间，并且超过9%0这个比例将流入比特币。不要误解，比特币也会受到影响。
In the aftermath of this ICO carnage, I would expect the same story as with the internet firms from 2001. Really good projects will give their token holders equity-like rights and fulfill securities regulations. New ICOs will be strong companies that will have a good value proposition and again, will actually be selling something valuable and not just hot air. When this ICO 2.0 phase starts, platforms such as Ethereum will also strongly recover. Just like it happened with the .com firms, I expect this wash out to be a positive medium term effect and to unlock a lot of value. There is not a doubt in my mind that the blockchain (and with it networks like Ethereum and currencies like Bitcoin) will to a large extent replace current market infrastructure and even actors (like banks and clearing houses or stock exchanges). But the wash out will need to happen before that and it will happen. It is not a question of IF, but WHEN.
In the aftermath of this ICO carnage, I would expect the same story as with the internet firms from 2001. Really good projects will give their token holders equity-like rights and fulfill securities regulations. New ICOs will be strong companies that will have a good value proposition and again, will actually be selling something valuable and not just hot air. When this ICO 2.0 phase starts, platforms such as Ethereum will also strongly recover. Just like it happened with the .com firms, I expect this wash out to be a positive medium term effect and to unlock a lot of value. There is not a doubt in my mind that the blockchain (and with it networks like Ethereum and currencies like Bitcoin) will to a large extent replace current market infrastructure and even actors (like banks and clearing houses or stock exchanges). But the wash out will need to happen before that and it will happen. It is not a question of IF, but WHEN.
在这场ICO大屠杀之后，我预计会出象2001年的互联网公司同样的情况。真正好的项目将给予代币持有者类似的股权并履行证券法规。新的 ICO 将由具有良好的价值主张的强大的公司来发行，而且将卖出一些有价值的东西，而不仅仅是空气。当这个ICO 2.0 阶段开始时，以太坊等平台也将强劲复苏。就像.com公司发生的一样，我预计这个冲击将是一个积极的中期效应，并释放出很多价值。无疑地，我认为，区块链（像以太坊和比特币这样的网络）将在很大程度上取代当前的市场基础设施，甚至行为主体（如银行，清算所或证券交易所）。但是在这之前就需要发生冲突，而且肯定会发生。这不是会不会发生的问题，而是什么时候发生。
In the aftermath of this ICO carnage, I would expect the same story as with the internet firms from 2001. Really good projects will give their token holders equity-like rights and fulfill securities regulations. New ICOs will be strong companies that will have a good value proposition and again, will actually be selling something valuable and not just hot air. When this ICO 2.0 phase starts, platforms such as Ethereum will also strongly recover. Just like it happened with the .com firms, I expect this wash out to be a positive medium term effect and to unlock a lot of value. There is not a doubt in my mind that the blockchain (and with it networks like Ethereum and currencies like Bitcoin) will to a large extent replace current market infrastructure and even actors (like banks and clearing houses or stock exchanges). But the wash out will need to happen before that and it will happen. It is not a question of IF, but WHEN.
在这场ICO大屠杀之后，我预计会出象2001年的互联网公司同样的情况。真正好的项目将给予代币持有者类似的股权并履行证券法规。新的 ICO 将由具有良好的价值主张的强大的公司来发行，而且将卖出一些有价值的东西，而不仅仅是空气。当这个ICO 2.0 阶段开始时，以太坊等平台也将强劲复苏。就像.com公司发生的一样，我预计这个冲击将是一个积极的中期效应，并释放出很多价值。无疑地，我认为，区块链（像以太坊和比特币这样的网络）将在很大程度上取代当前的市场基础设施，甚至行为主体（如银行，清算所或证券交易所）。但是在这之前就需要发生冲突，而且肯定会发生。这不是会不会发生的问题，而是什么时候发生。
In the aftermath of this ICO carnage, I would expect the same story as with the internet firms from 2001. Really good projects will give their token holders equity-like rights and fulfill securities regulations. New ICOs will be strong companies that will have a good value proposition and again, will actually be selling something valuable and not just hot air. When this ICO 2.0 phase starts, platforms such as Ethereum will also strongly recover. Just like it happened with the .com firms, I expect this wash out to be a positive medium term effect and to unlock a lot of value. There is not a doubt in my mind that the blockchain (and with it networks like Ethereum and currencies like Bitcoin) will to a large extent replace current market infrastructure and even actors (like banks and clearing houses or stock exchanges). But the wash out will need to happen before that and it will happen. It is not a question of IF, but WHEN.
在这场ICO大屠杀之后，我预计会出象2001年的互联网公司同样的情况。真正好的项目将给予代币持有者类似的股权并履行证券法规。新的 ICO 将由具有良好的价值主张的强大的公司来发行，而且将卖出一些有价值的东西，而不仅仅是空气。当这个ICO 2.0 阶段开始时，以太坊等平台也将强劲复苏。就像.com公司发生的一样，我预计这个冲击将是一个积极的中期效应，并释放出很多价值。无疑地，我认为，区块链（像以太坊和比特币这样的网络）将在很大程度上取代当前的市场基础设施，甚至行为主体（如银行，清算所或证券交易所）。但是在这之前就需要发生冲突，而且肯定会发生。这不是会不会发生的问题，而是什么时候发生。
Oh and dare I throw in that I highly doubt the legality of the USD Tether project. Do you really think the US government will allow a third party to offer their currency as a custodian without any public audits or licenses? I don’t…
哦，我敢说，我非常怀疑连接美元的项目合法性。你真的认为美国政府会允许第三方在没有任何公共审计或许可的情况下提供货币并作为管理人吗？我不...
I would therefore personally not invest into any random ICOs at all nor their respective token at this late stage in the game. The likelihood you can buy all of these cheaper at some point over the next 12 months is extremely high. Again, this is not to say that the blockchain is not the future and it is not even a case against Bitcoin (I would claim it is probably a case for it) or Ethereum. But I do hope this serves as a small wake up call to everyone getting delusional about the potential riches of the crypto world at this precise point in time.
因此，我个人在这个游戏的后期阶段，根本不会投任何随意的 ICO 或者购买它们各自的代币。在未来的12个月内，在某个时候还会可以买到这些代币，而且以更便宜的价格的可能性非常高。再一次，这并不是说区块链不是未来，它甚至不是针对比特币（我认为这可能是一个案例）或以太坊。但是我确实希望，在这个确切的时间点上，给妄想得到密码世界潜在财富的大家提个小小的醒。
Finally a short but important disclaimer: none of what I write here is to be construed as advice to buy or sell any kind of asset. It is merely my personal and not professional opinion. Any asset can go to zero.
最后是一个简短但重要的免责声明：我在这里写的任何内容都不能被解释为购买或出售任何类型资产的建议。这仅仅是我个人的而不是专业的意见。任何资产都可能归零。----------------------------------------------------
致力于前沿区块链知识和信息的传播，为中国融入全球区块链世界贡献一份力量。
如果您懂一些技术、懂一些英文，欢迎加入我们，加微信号:w1791520555。
鱼 区块链技术爱好者， 欢迎加微信号 oscnet 交流。
本文由币乎社区（bihu.com）内容支持计划赞助。
版权所有，转载需完整注明以上内容。
