Historically, a key advantage of successful people has been their intuition. As a rule, this skill is a gift received at birth and developed throughout life. For centuries, using the opinions of cunning people has been a common commercial practice – in modern times this relationship usually takes the form of hiring professional evaluators; contractors, real estate experts and so on.
Innovation projects have always been difficult to evaluate. In the last century, when we made decisions regarding technological investments, we had access only to the opinions of local experts. But with the advent of the information, the evaluation periods for start-ups and scientific projects have been shortened and the quality of these assessments has improved considerably. As a consequence of these improvements, it became possible for start-ups themselves to become more complex, and their number to grow geometrically. This unstoppable growth in innovation projects has been fueled by the global economy and the accessibility of resources, thanks to global networks.
The success of crowdfunding platforms has contributed to the birth of ICO, which is obviously a valuable tool, despite the fact that 90% of them are destined to fail, or are scams. In this regard, I agree with the opinion of Andreas Antonopoulos in all but the date of the revolution, which we hope to accelerate. Undoubtedly, given the abundance of innovative start-ups combined with the desire of the "crowd" to invest their savings in initiatives, we need a tool to conveniently analyze the startups that are (usually) very complex and always unique. Personally, I have often been surprised to learn about other cryptocurrency projects simply by leafing through them. It is difficult to estimate how many important details I could have lost between hundreds and thousands of fake ones.
In my opinion, at the current state of development of the Internet company, we require the * intelligent * organization of the growing flow of information (something that Google, Facebook and others have done in their fields for a long time) and in particular around business processes .
In the last two years, we have worked at Scientificcoin project, which aims to change relationships in science financing. Since the innovative IT start-ups are more or less comparable to applied science projects, I would like to focus on the issue of evaluation and evaluation of ICOs and describe the platforms available today. 😉
ICOBENCH, ICORATING and others (as far as I know there are at least 10) are platforms for the ICO rating. Most of these provide advertising services that, by definition, contradict the tasks of their platforms. But unfortunately such services can not exist on a non-commercial basis, nor can multimedia resources be used, nor any service that creates the background of the information that surrounds us.
A few days ago I received an offer from a stranger via the Telegram messaging offer to increase our ICOBENCH rating to the maximum level for a commission of about $ 2000, all match details can be found Here. But the Scientificcoin project is not an ICO, and this fact is described in most of the references to us. Furthermore, ironically, in several articles I have described existing rating platforms as an evil that would eventually be defeated by the decentralization of the evaluation process.
Every company is interested in what emerges when advertising with its own names. If you are looking for google "Scientificcoin", on the first page you will see two of our official sites and different evaluation sites. At the top of the list was ICObench, where our project has an evaluation of 3.4 points out of 5 possible. Previously, I have not paid attention to these assessments, as we are not seeking funding through crowdfunding and a low rating can not bother us. This offer offended me with the idea that since there was a proposal, then there must be some demand for these services. Their clients do not ask themselves on what basis and by whom their project has been evaluated? Which investors will listen to this apparently unreliable assessment?
As an experiment, I spent $ 400 (2 ETH) to increase our rating by 0.2 points. My new friend did not deceive me, and I received appreciative comments from two experts and an assessment of +0.2. Obviously, where there are tools for manipulation, there will be people who want to use them.
Both platform moderators and independent experts can yield to such manipulative tactics, because there is no reliable algorithm to control them. The same problems exist on a larger scale in the assessment of risk funds and public funds, where not only officials create corruption schemes, but also some scientists, knowing that their scientific work can not be assessed or verified. Compared to the ICO rating, the scale of annual financial losses due to scientific fraud, especially at the state level, is simply enormous.
Returning to the problem of evaluating scientific projects, it is important to note that money is not always the cause of the inefficiency of the existing model. Unfortunately, in the closed scientific community, the opinion of a famous scientist can put an end to the development of a new technology. Fearing to oppose a better-known scientist, leaders and consultants of young talents could affect the roots of his business. People who are not familiar with the scientific community believe that the most promising projects should have support and be implemented, but unfortunately science is performed by people subject to the same sins as us.
For example, the vanity of a famous scientist is often the cause of influence on the creations of young minds. Driven by the power of fame and recognition, many good people do not realize that their actions do not allow young people to overcome their works, and because scientific activities are difficult to evaluate and the number of experts is limited, not c & # 39; it is simply nobody to condemn their actions.
We use blockchain technology to create and guarantee impartial conditions that will contribute to the development of scientific research. Because of the mathematical algorithm and the evaluation of decentralized experts, an impartial and fair score will be given to each scientific development.
Capitalizing on the benefits of Internet culture, decentralized evaluation will significantly change the current relationships within the scientific community and their connections with venture capital firms. These conditions will guarantee an honest rating to venture capital investors, which they can rely on when they choose an investment project. Experts will be academic with academic qualifications, some of which may work anonymously, as well as representatives of various professions whose expert opinion can only be meaningful in large numbers, creating the so-called "wisdom of the crowd".
Using blockchain technologywe will create a database without the possibility of centralized moderation; the comment of each user will be registered permanently. Comments that are not only popular but also appropriate will be classified to be viewed by users. Today, the biggest forum on blockchain technology and its derivatives https://bitcointalk.org/ It clashed with this crisis, in which any commercial project announcement will not last even 15 minutes on the first page of the forum without the expensive PUMPERS services to keep it there.
The comments of active users with the status of an expert in a specific scientific area will be displayed in a separate block in order to separate the opinions of professionals from ordinary users. Going to the profile of that user will allow you to read all their comments and view the history of their ratings.
While the platform user reads the comments, their typical actions and projects displayed will be recorded by the IA, which in the future will allow the user to receive relevant and interesting topics for him in the first place. It is no secret that such technologies are already used by Google and others, and will continue to be developed, but certainly the decentralization implanted in our algorithms will introduce an element of trust.
The work to improve the algorithm will be endless, and for this we have provided a * blockchain vote * in which each holder of Scientificcoin will be able to vote and check the results; it is a pity that such a system will not be available soon to citizens when they choose their government!
(C) CEO Scientificcoin – Maxim Dvedenidov
Coin Shark does not promote and is not responsible for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or other materials on this page. Readers should do their own research before taking any action. The Coin Shark is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in the article.
Subscribe to The Coin Shark Facebook news: https://www.facebook.com/coinshark/