Burgess COMMENTARY
This is most likely a scam ... typical of a lot of ICOs
Peter Burgess

SCIENTIFICCOIN — Blockchain platform for scientific projects with decentralized projects valuation Blockchain technology may be one of the biggest discoveries of the last decade, nearly as important an innovation as the creation of the Internet. I’m not going to describe all the advantages of blockchain, but its inherent decentralization holds huge potential for effective interaction between an unlimited number of participants. Such terms as crowdfunding and coworking will change substantively in the near future due to decentralization. In 2017, a new type of crowdfunding has appeared, the so-called ICOs, and rampant increase in numbers. Yes, probably most ICO projects are deliberate frauds or newbies’ amateur attempts to create their first large business, having nothing but an idea under their belt. Nevertheless, the principle of crowd-investing has taken root in the global economy and will likely continue to grow. We are creating a platform to finance scientific discoveries using the advantages of blockchain. Imagine a situation where the developer of a new technology does not have to search for financing, a situation where the experts appraising a scientific project are as impartial as possible. As a rule, the main problem facing venture investors lies in obtaining unbiased, expert opinions. For this purpose, the expert board includes scientists, economists, lawyers, and marketing specialists. Decentralization, a core idea of cryptocurrency, will eliminate the factor of commercial bribery, of corruption, and reduce the number of intermediaries. The traditions that have formed around the cryptocurrency community allow for using the time, skills and knowledge of millions of people worldwide relatively free of charge. Many emerging cryptocurrencies attract followers by giving them coins for free (Аirdrops, Bounty Campaigns, etc.) in order to create a great number of coin holders, therefore cultivating excitement about the project, or merely as a speculation tool, which will be joined in by traders, small investors, and speculators. One thing is clear, the greatest part of the crypto market is occupied by young people aged 18–30. The greatest activity is exhibited by people who don’t have capital of their own, whose age is under 25 as a rule. These youngsters are ready to spend their time on publications in social networks, video blogs, and discussing different cryptocurrency trends in chatrooms; they perceive these actions as something similar to a computer game. In most cases, the reward for the active promotion of an emerging cryptocurrency is like a rare sword in an online RPG, which they can sell to another participant. These millions of people can funnel their energy toward more important things than pointless blockchain goodies, of which 90% will be forgotten in the nearest future. Remember Tezos who collected a record-setting amount of $232 million riding on a wave of popularity, for a seemingly good, necessary and interesting idea? However, it all ended in litigation and the division of assets among the founders. Or Worldcore, a scam project, which caused quite a stir with phony bank licenses, and they all ended up in jail. We are not going to doubt the honest intentions of the ICO projects which failed to become successful, because the root cause of their misfortunes is the incompetence of the founders themselves or the market participants they must interact with. The cryptocurrency market is still the “Wild West,” although it is moving in leaps and bounds towards creating a code of its own. The basis of the ScientificCoin project is a mathematically-based algorithm that works on the same principle as existing project rating methods profitably employed by venture funds, insurance companies, and stock exchanges. This algorithm is grounded on more than 70 major characteristics divided into 5 sections. When each project is reviewed, the rating is determined in accordance with the correlational regression model based on statistical analysis of the projects over a 9-month period. When filing an application for a rating of their project, those seeking financing will fill in a form containing precise questions and indicators regarding the project. Then the program will model the rating of the project by the correlation of its characteristics. The modeling ends with allocation of a rating for each characteristic of the project. In combination with the opinions of tens of thousands of people, even if they aren’t professionally knowledgeable in the question, this algorithm will be maximally effective. The expert will be rewarded for the time they spend on appraising the project, searching for information in the Internet, discovering weak points, omissions and other flaws. Each project that has attracted their target financing via ScientificCoin will pay 5% of the collected amount (these funds are annually distributed among ScientificCoin holders). The most active and successful experts get greater rewards than passive holders of ScientificCoin. Imagine a situation when you had to use a taxi, but the taxi at the hotel asked for 30 dollars for the trip to your location. You decided to save some money and took Uber, but unfortunately you had to wait 20 minutes longer than they had announced when you had ordered it. It happened due to a small mistake by the Uber driver who mixed up the address. In the end, you arrived at your destination for less than 30 dollars, but 20 minutes later than you had hoped. You didn’t miss anything, but you spent the extra 20 minutes. Will you use Uber again after that, understanding that it wasn’t the service’s fault, but a coincidence of circumstances associated with the human factor? Or will you prefer taking a taxi to the hotel? Perhaps you are a high-salaried lawyer, and an hour of your time costs 500 dollars, but you were 20 minutes late and didn’t earn 150 dollars, while saving 15 on the taxi ride. How seriously will you take such loss? Most people do not convert their personal time spent to a monetary cost for activities like reading books, watching movies, playing poker, and so on; we don’t calculate the “opportunity cost” of such things. Decentralized experts will perform a project appraisal quite responsibly, no worse than full-time experts at a venture fund, but they will not charge hundreds of dollars for their time. It will be nearly a hobby for them, a game, a socially beneficial action, like helping to clean up their neighborhood. The algorithm we have created will not allow them to take the project appraisal frivolously. The influence of an expert’s vote on the rating of a particular project will depend on a lot of factors, including the expert’s evaluation history, their personal details, and the level of uniqueness of the project. Compare the working day of a grinding-machine operator to the day of a freelancer whose activity involves writing articles and comments on the net, and so on. The differences between their working conditions help illustrate advantages granted by contemporary technology. They can be expressed in terms of comfort, in the freedom in choosing our working place and how we organize our time. The growth of information-processing technology can provide the combination of comfortable conditions and financial advantages for nearly anyone with access to them. Have you ever witnessed an idea or project of yours being discussed in a public forum? Have you observed comments, floods, trolling from people you’d call idlers? And what if their vibrant energy were focused on something positive? Such skills can be very useful for detecting dubious projects, uncovering missing details, flaws and potential scams. People who actively participate in discussions are better able to discover weak points in arguments. Like detectives, they are eager to dig down to the truth, blow the lid off, find all the hidden pitfalls, and deliver a public verdict. The involvement of decentralized experts will provide a lively and unbiased discussion of the projects being offered. The goals pursued by active commenters, trolls and flooders are material as a rule, their nicknames become recognizable due to such activity, they get followers, obtain the reputation of being an experts (or at least quasi-experts), and hence they obtain a whole range of opportunities to derive financial benefits by using their recognizability. In our case, the financial benefit from their actions will be quite tangible. The distinctiveness of our platform resides in its use of a hybrid system for project appraisal. With this method, we expect a revolution in the field of venture capital investments and crowdfunding. Most of the existing crowdfunding platforms place projects on their venues after pre-moderation by their own employees. If they had used a reliable algorithm, the number of projects proceeding to the state of fundraising would have been far fewer, and their chances for success much better. For example, the Kickstarter portal cannot keep a staff of professional experts because this is financially impractical. The users determine the level of a project’s reliability on their own, and they have to collect the information themselves, unlike ScientificCoin where the algorithm will not let the investor see nonviable projects, and topical questions associated with the appraisal of the project’s proceptivity will be raised in the process of an open, expert discussion. We have completed the beta-version of our platform. Anyone can register and use the tools on the platform to perform mining and appraisal of projects, which will be presented in the beta version as samples. We expect to attract about 3 million USD from large crypto investors and venture capitalists during the October-December span of 2018 by means of the private sale of ScientificCoin tokens. Considering that we have already put together a team consisting of hundreds of scientists, many of whom hold a PhD, we’ll be able to complete the development of the platform by February 2019. At the same time, our own blockchain will be created according to the proof-of-research principle, the emission of ScientificCoin will amount to 100 million coins, which will be exchanged into ScientificCoin tokens emitted previously. We have intentionally refused to organize an ICO, because we do not believe it possible to attract small investors’ interest in the present situation. In my opinion, most of such investors have already invested the available funds in other projects and cannot withdraw from them due to sharp falls in the value of the tokens after entering the exchanges (unfortunately they will have to wait very long or endlessly). In our case, a collection of 50–100 large investments is a more realistic opportunity than spending time and money on advertising like the numerous ICO projects. Based on previous experience (http://healthmonitor.io), where we collected 12% more funds than was necessary, with only six large investors participating, we have come to realize that when there is a complete product and transparency, interest for the project from the professional community will be guaranteed. We received the Oscar at Blockshow in Las Vegas, which powered by Cointelegraph. https://www.facebook.com/blockshowcom/videos/300581983826872/ And our team is going to present the ScientificCoin project at the iBlockchain Summit (http://www.iblockchainsummit.com/) in Guangzhou, China on November 2–3, 2018, as well as at the BlockShow Asia (https://blockshow.com/), which will be held on November 27-December 1 in Singapore. BlockchainVenture FundScientific SoftwareCrowdfunding PlatformsCrowdfunding Go to the profile of Maxim Dvedenidov Maxim Dvedenidov Medium member since May 2018 CEO Scientificcoin - blockchain platform for scientific projects. http://scientificcoin.com