February 18, 2026

Capitalizations Index – B ∞/21M

5 Really Weird Cryptocurrencies That Really Do Exist |

5 really weird cryptocurrencies that really do exist |

5 Really Weird Cryptocurrencies That Really Do Exist |

5 really weird cryptocurrencies that really do exist |

Before the appearance of Ethereum, due to the success of Bitcoin, many new cryptocurrencies appeared. Most of them basically took Bitcoin code, made some minor changes and then used rebranding. When Ethereum appeared on the market, everything became simpler. According to market analysts at Cryptoext.com, it is now possible to launch a brand new cryptocurrency with a unique code right on top of Ethereum. Basically, it is so simple that numerous weird coins appeared. Those below are among them and you may want to learn about them, mainly if you want to have a good laugh.

Garlicoin

A Litecoin fork was created and Garlicoin appeared. When it hit the market, the focus was actually put on garlic bread. Then, the community interfered and the shift was made to garlic. So, we have a cryptocurrency that relates to garlic. If vampires exist, they surely hate it.

TrumpCoin And PutinCoin

The only two world leaders that have an eponymous cryptocurrency are Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, as the name implies. As expected, these two are not actually connected with the digital coins.

The launch of TrumpCoin had the purpose of promoting the message of the now US President during the elections. With PutinCoin there is no real purpose or use.

Finally Usable Crypto Karma

The premise of this cryptocurrency is incredibly simple. All you need to do is to transform it into an acronym. The developers practically stated that with this coin you can finally put a real valuation on a F***. Its focus is on tipping. Basically, when you see something that you really like on Facebook, Reddit, Instagram and so on, you can give a F*** (Finally Usable Crypto Karma).

The Honest Useless Ethereum Token

This cryptocurrency practically shows how easy it is to create digital currencies with the use of the Ethereum blockchain. The Useless Ethereum Token is marketed as a token that has absolutely no value and that will never have value. It is even said on the website that the only purpose is having the owner spend the money people send.

Do not make the mistake of thinking this is a scam because it is not. The creator always said that the only purpose is to have people offer him money. That money will be spent on whatever he wants. This incredible brutal honesty actually gave him donations of around $200,000.

Bitcoiin

This cryptocurrency is, most likely, the best example of choosing the worst possible name. When it appeared, the idea was to create a much better Bitcoin. It combined elements from both Ethereum and Bitcoin. The idea might have been great but the name was horrible. When you search for Bitcoiin on Google, you automatically get results for Bitcoin as the search engine thinks you made a spelling mistake.

While the name was horrible, bad decisions continued. Steven Seagal was actually hired as a brand ambassador. This practically made the coin a joke when all it really needed was a better name. Not even the founder stayed with the project.

Published at Sun, 03 Mar 2019 02:37:52 +0000

Previous Article

Electroneum- A Dirt-Cheap Blockchain Phone- Explained by a 13 year old

Next Article

DRAWING BITCOIN LIKE A CHILD

You might be interested in …

SEC/NASAA Ring in 2018 by Hinting at Need for (More) Cryptocurrency Regulation

sec nasaa

Yesterday, January 4, 2018, the three prominent figures of the U.S. Securities and Exchance Commission (SEC) endorsed the concerns raised in the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA)’s cautionary directive on cryptocurrencies, ICOs, and other “Cryptocurrency-Related Investment Products.” Jay Clayton, the Chair of the SEC; Michael Piwowar, the former acting Chair of the SEC; and Kara Stein, a prominent figure in the SEC and an author of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, joined NASAA, the association that is the voice of state securities agencies in the U.S.,  in urging “Main Street investors” to go beyond the headlines and hype to understand cryptocurrency investment risk.

While this is not the first SEC commentary we have seen on cryptocurrencies, this iteration of caution raises the imminent possibility of the SEC and NASAA intervention into the space, as the SEC-lauded directive showed that 94 percent of state and provincial securities regulators (or roughly 63 of the 67 securities regulators under NASAA) believe there is a “high risk of fraud” involving cryptocurrencies and that all of the securities regulators believe “more regulation is needed for cryptocurrency to provide greater investor protection.” 

Of note: Membership in NASAA not only comprises all 50 state securities regulators in the U.S. but also includes securities regulators in Canada and Mexico (as well as the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. According to Bob Webster, Director of Communications for NASAA, the survey referenced in the directive included NASAA members from the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

The SEC statement by the three most prominent figures in the organization called the NASAA release “a timely and thoughtful reminder,” reminding investors themselves that “when they are offered and sold securities, they are entitled to the benefits of state and federal securities laws.” From a legal standpoint, this comment implies that some or all cryptocurrencies, ICOs and other cryptocurrency-related investment products will be deemed by the SEC as “securities” and that those offering these products may be soon facing accusations of selling unregistered securities in violation of U.S. Securities Laws.

There is a possible point of disparity between the NASAA directive and the coinciding SEC statement: whether cryptocurrencies are “currency.” The usual definition for currency includes the requirements they serve as an accepted medium of exchange and can be a store of value for market participants.

NASAA’s directive states that, “Cryptocurrencies are a medium of exchange that are created and stored electronically in the blockchain, a distributed public database that keeps a permanent record of digital transactions” (emphasis added).

The SEC statement, however, has a slightly different interpretation of the NASAA Directive: that cryptocurrencies “lack many important characteristics of traditional currencies, including sovereign backing and responsibility.” The SEC went further, stating that cryptocurrencies “are now being promoted more as investment opportunities than efficient mediums for exchange.”

This view, unchecked, would allow the SEC to step in to regulate these “investment opportunities.” Whether there was a differing view the SEC wished to convey, or the statement was meant to convey support of the NASAA directive while opening the door for broader SEC intervention into the space, only time will tell.

One final note: FINRA, the non-profit organization authorized by Congress to be regulator in charge in the U.S. for oversight and enforcement actions against broker/dealers on behalf of investor protection, was noticeably silent in joining the SEC and NASAA in issuing a new statement (the previous two warned investors not to fall for cryptocurrency-related stock scams and gave a primer on ICOs).

FINRA Media Relations Specialist, Dylan Menguy, responded to inquiry on FINRA’s view of the statements by the SEC and NASAA by referring bitcoin Magazine to this press release where FINRA warned investors of cryptocurrency-related stock scams.

NASAA’s Bob Webster clarified the survey inclusion as referenced above in the article, and, when asked about the potential disparity discussed above, stated, “…I don’t see a discrepancy between the two views.  Cryptocurrencies are a medium of exchange and they are being promoted as investment opportunities. For clarification on the SEC’s position, you should contact the SEC.”

At the time of this writing, the SEC has not responded to a request for comment.


The post SEC/NASAA Ring in 2018 by Hinting at Need for (More) Cryptocurrency Regulation appeared first on Bitcoin Magazine.