Some times I am going to publish my peer reviews on blockchain projects. Today IMHO for this. Project's on cyber•Fund.
Reason for choosing this paper for peer review:
Key innovations proposed by this paper are (1) biometrics identification and (2) gamificated emission based on (1). Worth to note that work don't actually try to solve problems raised in Chapter 5.
This paper propose nothing in terms of solving (1) thus (2) make no sense at all. Absence of contract logic for (2) confuse and mislead readers and/or potential investors.
For implementing (1) there is no need in new currency as users's auth either (a) will be implemented using standard Ethereum ECDSA signatures or (b) will involve some centralized infrastructure. In order to get investment for implementing (1) I'd better issue speculative token representing rights for IP if awesome on-blockchain biometry identification for Ethereum ecosystem were invented. But even in this case I doubt that this can happens in short or middle term.
I am not going to add this paper in my Blockchain Library
