The Problem Is That You’re Lazy
Morons gonna moron.
What excites me about the Boolberry project is what it means for the broader cryptosphere, not Boolberry itself. What did I write within the first 500 words?
Many people will misread this post as a pro-Boolberry post and this post neither defends nor attacks Boolberry — rather, it looks at how much waste is in the cryptosphere presently and how the Boolberry project shows us an example of possible waste removal.
And the very next sentences:
If you’re too lazy to read an entire post, stop reading now, as you’ll walk away thinking that Boolberry is a great deal, when this post has nothing to do with whether a person should buy, sell or hold Boolberry. Given its history, the entire cryptosphere is incredibly high risk, not to mention how risky one project is.
Isn’t reading amazing?
Do you headline surf? Then stop reading FinTekNeeks immediately; if you don’t have the time to actually read what we write, we don’t want you to ever read our site again. We do not write to, or teach dumb people and this is as true for our posts as it is for our books, courses, webinars, etc. We have no interest in someone who isn’t diligent enough to read free material.
Read the post again. It has absolutely nothing to do with the viability of Boolberry. It has everything to do with the amount of crypto-spam that exists and how we can reduce it. I do make an assessment about Boolberry at the end:
As for Boolberry, we’ll see what happens — I remain highly skeptical of anything with it, even though Boolberry is sound from an economic and technical view (it lacks a visionary leader — which is unfortunate).
Boolberry is a solid project from a technical and economic perspective; but the reason that it’s incredibly high risk is because it’s a terrible project from a visionary perspective. In order for a project to succeed, it must be solid as a technical, economic, financial and visionary project. Even if a project meets two of those criteria, that’s not enough.
As for speculation, speculation is exactly what it sounds like — it is playing a less-than-1%-odd that something works out. Huge payout if right, but 99.9%+ probability of being wrong. Still, a price of $10 to buy a bunch of something at $0.007ish price is how risky compared to losing 3 hours watching a boring movie that cost $15?