3 ms·

> the whitepaper is too thin on tech details and Which is the #1 sign of every crypto scam (or a less maliciously: of a poorly constructed crypto project). A

> the whitepaper is too thin on tech details and Which is the #1 sign of every crypto scam (or a less maliciously: of a poorly constructed crypto project). A whitepaper at the very least should outline the incentive mechanisms of _all_ the actors (and their actions) in the system (and not just the miners like they do). On top of that it has the very traditional real world->blockchain problem of needing to have verified data about the real world on the blockchain for the token to work. "The data that each smart meter will transmit will be validated and certified by the blockchain" sadly are just empty words, as the blockchain can neither validate nor certify anything about the real world on its own (and any "smart meter" can be tempered with). That's also only a single data point that's required for the token to work (if everything else holds up). They would also need prior energy consumption, which the implementing companies would be incentivized to downplay. The concept is as full of holes as your run-of-the mill 2018 bubble crypto project.

ensiferum 6y ago
I implemented a POC project with s contract and payment settling system. We settled on a solution where both parties would invoke a etherum transaction and would provide the details of the (business) transaction from their POV. I.e the goods (electricity) provided and the payment etc details. If there was a difference the data for that transaction would be flagged as "needs inspection/resolution". Otherwise the smart contract would distribute the payment tokens as agreed and record the data in the ledger. But yeah all the data eventually has to come outside of the blockchain itself. This is always the weakness and shifts the trust issue to whoever is providing the data. Blockchain itself is no Magic bullet to resolve the fundamental issue of "trust"

ensiferum 6y ago

I implemented a POC project with s contract and payment settling system. We settled on a solution where both parties would invoke a etherum transaction and would provide the details of the (business) transaction from their POV. I.e the goods (electricity) provided and the payment etc details. If there was a difference the data for that transaction would be flagged as "needs inspection/resolution". Otherwise the smart contract would distribute the payment tokens as agreed and record the data in the ledger. But yeah all the data eventually has to come outside of the blockchain itself. This is always the weakness and shifts the trust issue to whoever is providing the data. Blockchain itself is no Magic bullet to resolve the fundamental issue of "trust"