You are probably right that it is a 100 times easier to raise money in ICOs than through traditional VCs — and it is probably a good argument for startups to do that, but that is on the expense of the investors or rather speculators who buy those tokens. The liquidity that you quote as the main advantage for investors is the effect of short term speculation. It is a cliche in the startup scene that execution is more important than the idea — ICOs sell the ideas, the dreams in the form of the white papers, but the investors have no way to control the execution. This is a common problem with all the other crowdfunding methods: https://medium.com/@zby/the-problem-with-crowdfunding-81b53f963387 . It takes a lot of work to control the execution at the early stages when there are not and cannot be any strict reporting standards, and it does not make sense to do that if your stake in the company is too small. And that is not mentioning all the problems with ICO investors having no formal right to anything.

There can be an economic niche though for ICOs — but I am pretty sure that when we start to understand how it really works it will not be a 100% easier to do ICOs than tranditional founding.

And by the way ICOs are an adaptation the old founding ideas into the crypto space — if you really want to be revolutionary then do an Airdrop — Airdrops are better ICOs:)