Thoughs on Humaniq? It's an interesting project and they've

The original niggercoin

>>2867768
Bought during the ICO but have since sold for a 30k.

A fucking bunch of red flags for me:
>Their CMO (the editor in chief of Blockchain News) left the team and it was never announced
>they haven't changed their page from the ICO
>addendum to the above: at one point they did have something up on Humaniq.com, but its been since taken down and only now are they claiming it'll be up on the 26th
>most of the articles about them are either paid press releases that show up elsewhere, or come from IntelligentHQ (which is owned by the CEO), or are because someone is on the take (example, the London correspondent of CoinTelegraph is listed as an advisor)
>slack channel (which requires requesting access; the only ICO slack channel I have seen that isn't open) is mostly people cheerleading the token price or pump and dump types
>no real documentation or word about the multiple pilot projects, aside from that one shit Ghana one that I could have done with $50
>reposting/recycling old blog posts and stories on social media
>low quality strategic business plan back in May
>haven't addressed how cheap $15 to $20 smartphones from China will accurately capture a user's biometrics (note the lack of finger print scans)
>half of leadership team is connected via LinkedIn to the president of Liberland (whom I've met multiple times and can assure you he's a scumbag)

And a bunch of other things.

Basically, for a project like this, they're not communicating anywhere near as much as they should be doing. That makes me uncertain.

>>2867877
lurk more

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKKnRbJfbeM&t=1s

>>2867908
>implying I wasn't following the weekly videos

Breadcrumbs meant to assuage people holding the tokens.

Need I remind you that, according to their own technology presentation, the app itself should have been released in June?
http://forum.humaniq.co/?_ga=2.41713639.411716770.1500933204-1653357786.1500933204

And what is it they're releasing on Wednesday again? The lite version of the app only?

Plus there are bunch of questions that are left unanswered. As I said above, how will they address the gap when it comes to biometrics?

How will they deal with KYC regulations around the world? Sure, I got Ahmed the villager from Anbar province to sign up, but how do we know he isn't fronting for ISIS all the same?

It goes on. I remain iffy.

>>2868007
>http://forum.humaniq.co/?_ga=2.41713639.411716770.1500933204-1653357786.1500933204
Wrong link. Should have been this one:
https://humaniq.co/assets/downloads/technology_presentation_en.pdf

Though take a look at the low quality of the forum as well.

I don't get how this project is going to earn them any money. It's going to be extremely abused in any of the poor villages they want to reach with it. Imagine they actually manage to deliver the working product and do what they planned, ie. just give each person some money via humaniq coin for activating the account. What's going to prevent poorfags from activating it several million times per person? They all look similar, they can smear feces over their faces or wear fucking leopard hats, who the fuck knows - they will certainly figure out a way to abuse the system, sell everything and make the coin worth zebra shit.

>>2867877
same. made 100% and never looked back

>>2868146
>I don't get how this project is going to earn them any money

That's another concern: they've set themselves up as a non-profit rather than a normal company. Now, on the one hand, this makes it far easier to say that they're doing this for humanitarian reasons and will make access to the UN and all the other NGOs far easier.

On the other hand, it means the only way for ICO investors to make money is if the token is widely adopted over the long-term.

As for the biometric and potential for abuse concern, this is another reason why I dropped. If these were Apple iPhone 5 or high phones, then sure, I can see them doing it. But using the camera on cheap, mass-produced Chinese smartphones that retail for like $20? Going to need some serious convincing on this one.

>>2868231
Interesting, thanks for giving me all that extra info!

>>2868292
Consider it the regrets of a former investor who was a believer but then did deeper research.

One last bit:
They have a stable rating from ICORating...
http://icorating.com/project/30/Humaniq
...back when the ICO mania was starting in March/April.

However, you if you to the bottom of their website, you'll find that they have HMQ listed as a client. Even if its done "non-partially", the crypto world has no regulations. So it might as well be conflict of interest.

And even in their report they highlight some of the concerns I've brought up.

So unless this Wednesday meeting is the project's equivalent of glasnost and everything comes out to to the open, I ain't touching this thing again.

I'd rather do WeTrust or OMG or some other project with either constant communication or a good track record.