Seele ICO overview.
Seele ICO got overhyped and currently has over 25 thousand people on telegram channel (and its keep growing).
I decided to make deep analysis of this ICO and found a lot of unpleasant "surprises" about this project.
Seele is powered by an up-scalable Neural Consensus protocol for high throughput concurrency among large scaleheterogeneous nodes and is able to form a unique heterogeneous forest multi-chain ecosystem. It's based on Neural Consensus Protocol, Heterogeneous Forest Network(HFN), VTP ,VHTTP and (QVIC)
So what's wrong with this project?
First of all, it claims to be "Blockchain 4.0", meanwhile its GitHub is only 15 days old. Claiming to be "blockchain 4.0", while putting Ethereum as "Blockchain 2.0" and Bitcoin as "Blockchain 1.0" is completely irresponsible. This is like stating that Oranges are fruits 1.0 and Apples are fruits 2.0 - complete nonsense from technological view.
Project claims to be "multi-chain ecosystem" and Blockchain 4.0, meanwhile it creates ERC-20 standard tokens based on Ethereum blockchain.
It claims to have partnership with Stanford University, UCLA, and The University of Edinburg. I didn't find any confrmation online, so I made a call to UCLA and Stanford University. I was told that they can't neither confirm nor dismiss partnership statement since they are not aware of this project working with University. It might have some connection on the level of programs (since Universities has a lot of different programs running), however without any specific details they can't confirm it yet. I will try to reach them again later with more information.
There are a lot of logical and technical gaps in the project. According to the white paper, "From the random selection of nodes in the consensus process,... the user calculates from his private key whether or not it is selected... this random selection process is non-interactive, the attacker could not in advance know which nodes are selected". It's not an accurate statement, since attacker knows HIS OWN private key.
According to the white paper "with s not less than 20%, for the system that failure of the node does not exceed 40%, are able to achieve the overall system convergence. If the value of s is high, the fewer number of convergences are required, the better"
That's a completely incoherent statement.Twitter was registered in January 2018 and BitcoinTalk thread was created on January 25th;
Heterogeneous Forest Network is supposed to be a multi-layer blockchain structure, while this structure is absolutely possible, we don't have any practical tests or calculations that can prove scalability of this particular network; There are no confirmations and tests from verified by independent 3d party;
Per official website "Our network and consensus not only concept proven, but also prototype verification in our test network. we're trying to test in more larger scale network", however there are no publicly available prototype that is opened for public test therefore this statement can't be supported by evidence;
Someone impersonated an administrator of the ICO’s telegram group and committed fraud while posing as Seele’s data analyst Dr. Nick Smith. The receiving ethereum address now holds 2,162.49 ether, worth about $1.8 million at the time of the theft.
Summary: Despite hype of this project and growing FOMO, I don't think that this project has solid technical background. Weak white paper and road map, absence of publicly proven concept, fresh accounts without track of performance, loud names of partners that haven't confirmed partnership yet and other small details throw too many red flags for me. I don't think that this project is a scam or that project is absolutely horrible but I don't see any technological base for this project to stay floating on the market in the long-term perspective.
This project might grow due to the marketing efforts of the team and several YouTubers that support this project, however I won't touch this project with a 10-foot pole.
@supermeatboy