Anyone who follows my blog will know that I wrote an in-depth post on Bitconnect some time ago.

My main point in this post was nothing to do with usual accusations of whether or not it was a pyramid/ponzi scheme, but to do with the fact that it was the first crypto-currency to properly invest in professional and stylish promotional videos. What particularly bothered me about these promotional music videos was that they were aimed at young people who were of college age. Between 18 to 24. In my view this was a turning point in the crypto-space and a rather dangerous one.

Those who have been involved in crypto-currency, for any certain amount of time, will have accepted the fact that the crypto-space is pretty much the wild west. Prices can fall and rise like a roller coaster and therefore it is not a game for the faint of heart and it is wise to gamble money you cannot afford to lose. Fair enough, but when you deliberately go out and represent yourself as a new type of future crypto-style bank that can, and will, change your life, then, in my eyes, this was crossing a moral boundary. And as such, if Bitconnect crashed, I believed it could have a huge detrimental affect on the confidence/belief on the crypto-market space. Many disagreed with me on this saying that "the share value of Bitconnect was only small compared to the market as a whole", and that "there had already been many such scams that had crashed" and they not had any affect on the market at all. Although this was true, it seems that my meaning was misunderstood. I felt that this time things would be different due to the moral issue.

You see, truth will always be more powerful than cleverness because truth penetrates all our defenses and thus has a strong reaction on our emotions.
When a share price falls we are disappointed. When we are swindled we become angry. But if our children are hurt, then we become outraged and want action to be taken against those who hurt them.
Hundreds of thousands of college students had invested in Bitconnect and now most of them have lost all their savings. How many of these students invested without their parents knowing is not known but I can imagine the enormous impact this must have had on families. Many, who appeared not to have not a sympathetic bone in their body, commented; "it was their own fault because they agreed to the risk when they invested in Bitconnect". I did notice that most of those saying this did not have children themselves so perhaps it was difficult to empathise. My point here is that, by making these videos specifically aimed at the young and impressionable, Bitconnect crossed a moral line. They were making false promises and painting a bright picture that just could not be fulfilled. If they knew this then it reveals a distinct lack of any human decency.
Do we want this?
Should we accept this?

And what of the numerous Crypto-Vlogers out there giving their "educated opinion" - "but by the way, this is not financial advice and do you own research". Come on, you cant promote yourself with your "educated opinion" and then say: "do your own research". IS that not why we are watching you, because you did the research for us? Why then should I listen to you at all? Why not show some guts and stand by what you preach? And then when Bitconnect crashed many smugly enjoyed saying: "I told you so" - but at the same time: "this is not financial advice"

It is one thing to say that the crypto-space is the "wild west", but does that mean that we should accept that dishonesty is then normal?

Even in the towns of the old wild west there was a sheriff, a jail and a church.
On one hand, when a new alt coin is being launched (an ICO) they make all sorts of promises in order to entice you to invest in them. And then at the same time they say: "Oh and by the way, you can lose of all your money and there will be nothing you can do about it".
How hypocritical can you be?
Such hypocrisy can only be tolerated for so long and that length is determined by how long the fury of greed can be sustained. Only, truth and integrity stand the test of time.

Truth be known, such styled promotional advertising campaigns, as what Bitconnect made, are no different than what high street banks make all the time - promising a secure economic future to the new generations. These also cross a moral boundary. Anyone who calls Bitconnect a ponzi scheme must also understand that all economies are basically a ponzi scheme. The only difference with fiat currencies is that they are backed by Governments and Governments can (if they wish) bail out any financial crises if and when things go wrong.

Governments bail out the banks by simply borrowing or printing more money and hand it over to the banks as a low interest loan. It is the tax payer that ends up paying back this loan over many generations. All this slowly devalues the currency in a process known as inflation. When Lehman Brothers crashed in 2008 it ended up bringing down the whole fiat Ponzi scheme and it only happened because the US Government refused to bail Lehman Brothers out. Letting it "fail" lead to a chain reaction that almost brought down entire worlds economy. In the end the Government bailed out the big banks by borrowing from the Federal Bank (which is a private bank) of which tax payers will all be paying back for decades to come. However, in crypto-land, there is no Government to bail out any currency if it "fails". But make no mistake, the fall of Bitconnect and the fall of Lehman Brothers are both equal in their lack of any moral backbone or integrity. And don't expect to find any moral code from any bank either.

The fall of Lehman brothers and the financial crash was so huge that it was bound to cause hysterical and historical consequences. Some of which would be unforeseeable. But when the radioactive dust from the financial atomic bomb had settled the overwhelming conclusion was that we should never allow such a thing to ever happen again. But we all know it will.

One of the unforeseeable consequences was the creation of Bitcoin

Bitcoin grew fast for one reason only, because people no longer trusted the banks. Early adopters of Bitcoin were not in it to become rich but as a way of protesting against the corrupt financial system.
Money and corruption go hand in hand. As stories of people becoming rich from Bitcoin began to be reported in the media, it began to attracted a new type of investor. What I call "the anarchy investor." As with any wagon that carries a band that plays a new tune it will always attract followers. And so began the creation of the first alternative crypto-currencies such as Litecoin and Ethereum. Today we have come to the point where we new alt coins coming out almost on a daily bases. From my perspective, the motivation for crypto-currency is no longer about protesting against a corrupt financial system but about getting rich quick.

We have all forgotten why we are all here and become blinded by the primal motivation of greed.

Greed and fear has always been the driving force of money markets, that is not new, but it seems that we conveniently forget that greed is also the primary cause of crashes too. And so now we have come to the point where the crypto-market is falling as fast as the Twin Towers. It is not only because of Bitconnect of course.

Greed always kills the goose that laid the golden egg.

We all know that the official main-stream view of Bitcoin and alt-coins is that it is mainly for criminal use. Money laundering, swindling, scams and gangster activity is the base of Bitcoin. Although in recent years this view has become somewhat watered down, it cannot be denied that there is indeed a criminal aspect involved in the crypto-underworld. Just a note here: Anyone who ever tells me that banks do not do such things I usually answer that with one word: "HSBC", and that usually silences them. The monumental disgusting crime of money laundering for the Mexican drug Cartels was punished with a fine that cost the HSBC bank only one month of profits. Not a single bank executive went to jail. In the mean time 180,000 people a year are sent to prison for dealing or found in possession of drugs. Can anyone deny that this has sent a signal to the banks that they are now above the law?

Crypto-currency will NOT be protected like this because it is not protected by the Governments. Criminals, and bank executives, appear to have no morals whatsoever with greed being their primary motivation. Thus, as the price of crypto-currencies has risen, so has the number of scammers and black-hat hackers. Therefore the number one threat to crypto-currency has now become about online security.

It is now open season for scammers and black-hat hackers who are mercilessly stealing, blackmailing or hjacking every valuable crypto-coin they can get their hands on. At one time it was the big corporations who only needed to worry, then the crypto-exchanges became in the line of fire, but now it is ordinary people who are being targeted. And as we know, "ordinary decent folk" generally have a poor idea of online security.

This is a potential game changer in the crypto-space.

For if this escalates it will eventually bring the entire crypto-space for good. Ever since I got hacked myself I have not invested a single cent in crypto-currencies. I learned the hard way just how vulnerable I was to the power of the hacker. I spent many days with a nephew of mine who is a "hobby hacker" and he informed me that if a hacker targets you then there is pretty much nothing you can do. He advised me to hold off on investing until security has improved.
And so it has come to the stage where we are all living in a ticking time bomb waiting to explode.
As more people get their crypto stolen, and then tell others, what do you think with happen? -
No new money will come in and the market will become stagnant leading to the price to gradually fall. And so one of the most valuable resources the criminal world has ever seen and used gets destroyed by the very activity of the criminals themselves. The classic story of greed killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

I recently saw on Twitter that President Trump was set to have a meeting with all of the top banks of the world. Guess what was the number one issue on the agenda was? Hacking. We have come to the point where none of us are safe online and I believe this is going to serious detrimental consequences in the near future if it is not sorted out. We are all being held to ransom by those who are clever with code but who seem to have no moral code.

So is the Crypto-space heading for financial collapse?

I don't believe so, however I wonder if we are heading for a stagnant period. As I said, I refuse to invest any of my money into crypto until security is improved. The fall of Bitconnect and the recent enormous hack of NEM has taught us some hard lessons and it will take some time for it all to sink in. But out of the ashes of every fire rises a phoenix. And the phoenix bird has wings that can sour above the bullshit because now we have all learned what bullshit is and what it looks like. And after the ash has settled and the air is again clear, we will pick ourselves up and start again with wiser heads and more careful hands.

But we will need stronger locks and better keys if we are to place our trust and hard earned money into a vehicle that can be easily stolen.

Once cars were very easy to steal and so it was a lucrative business for crime. Car theft has fallen dramatically in recent years due to GPS and other technology making it very difficult and impractical for the car thief. It has become easier just to steal the money and buy the car legitimately instead. This is what needs to happen in the crypto space. But I do see such things happening on the horizon. Recently IOTA announced they will be soon releasing a new wallet that is not only more user friendly but that they have worked relentlessly on improving security and would not release it until after extensive testing.

I have also noticed that all knew trading platforms are insisting on 2 factor authentication. This is an improvement but it is still not yet good enough. The infamous net security legend John McAfee recently had his phone hacked. People laughed but it was not funny because it was not his actual phone that got hacked but the phone company that hosted his phone. Hackers got in to the phone company, found his phone number, and format here diverted all his calls to another phone that they owned. What could McAffe have done about that?
If a security expert is not safe then who is?

So what is the answer?

It seems to me that in order for Crypto-currencies to survive there needs to be some protective regulation. I cannot believe I am saying this because I know full well that Government themselves are rife with corruption. But what is the alternative, mob rule under the hands of hackers and scammers?

With regulation can come insurance. If a hacker steals your money from your bank account then the bank claims insurance. This is because a bank has official status. If crypto-currency had officially status then you could also insure your crypto. This is why I recently wrote why I believe that this could drive crypto-currencies into the arms of the banks - who could offer "crypto-vault" services offering full "hacker-insurance" cover. A view point I was also laughed at about.

Online security has always been an issue because the web was never designed for be secure from the beginning and thus it is a constant battle against those who want to steal from you or to spy on you. All of us live in this fake safety bubble hoping that the hacker/scammer or Government agency will not target us. But a bubble is about as secure as vault made of paper.

As for investing in crypto-currencies…this is my two cents worth...

After checking how good the security is,I would only invest in those that have a practical use or fulfil a genuine need.
To explain what I mean, I will just inform those who do not already know, that Putin is exploring in the idea of creating his own official Russian crypto-currency - a kind of "Crypto-Ruble." Norway is also looking into making an "e-coin".
When Governments begin making their own crypto-currencies main stream populations will not hesitate to use them because they know they will be "official" and thus insurable We also know that when one country does something then other countries tend to follow. And if this happens, where will this leave all the hundreds of crypto-currencies? If Bitcoin i not careful. it will gradually lose its status because it is being divided so many times. At some point it will no longer be clear which was/is the true Bitcoin. This will inevitable push people to look in more detail at Alt-coins. Some say DASH is a good alternative because it plans to rival PayPal. Dash does have good technology behind it, however I am skeptical. What is to stop PayPaL creating its own crypto-token. Just recently Kodak has just launched its own crypto-currency.

And so I ask myself a serious question: What would/could survive if Governments created their own "official" crypto-currencies?

Well let´s look at Steem. You may or may not know that the Steem blockchain is actually one of the most advanced block-chains out there. Therfore it will stand the test of time technically. It also has a practical use in that members can reward bloggers for posts. It has already created its own ecosystem and this ecosystem will only become stronger as more members join and value the steem token is accepted.

The steem token itself can also be used in other platforms, for example - DTUBE. As time goes by, I believe the steem token will be viewed as, and function as, a kind of share certificate - (like a stock-market share) Imagine if members had bought shares in FaceBook when it first came out - well they would all be fabulously rich now. The value of Steemit as a platform that cannot be altered or censored will also grow thus adding to its importance. Thus, logic dictates that Steemit will not only survive but thrive. Steemit´s position in the list of crypto-currencies has gradually fallen as newer crypto-currencies have taken the lime light, but don't be surprised if you see Steem begin to creep up slowly but surely. Steem is a strong and steady tortoise. It may not win the race but it will certainly be in the top ten. Only Steemit could destroy Steemit.

IOTA is making friends, and very important ones, all over the place, with them recently being in talks with TESLA.

IOTA is not just another crypto-token but it actually fills a need that will be vital in the very near future. As robots begin to dominate, there will be a ~~need~~ for a form of Ai currency. IOTA also helps with improving security of IoT ; the "Internet of things." making it more difficult for hackers to infiltrate the system. In fact, the "Tangle" (rather than the block-chain) solves one vital problem pertaining to all web based technology vulnerable to hackers. DDOS attacks. The Tangle works in such a way that the more people are on there the more faster and more secure the network becomes. Thus eliminating DDOS attacks.

As well as this, IOTA is now in talks with the Norwegian Government (something I predicted would happen over a year ago. IOTA was created by a Norwegian citizen) If the Norwegian Government decide to partner with IOTA , and I see no reason why they should not, then it would give IOTA "official status". With official status comes added security and higher value.

In psychiatry circles, the Roman emperor Markus Aurelias is known as "the godfather of psychology". In his book "Meditations" He writes: For each particular thing look for governing principles. Ask; what is it in itself? What is its nature? What needs does it serve? This is what I do with every old and new crypto-token that it out there in the crypto-space. And if I cannot find a satisfying answer then I will not invest in it.

Hope this blog was helpful.