Bitcoin Forum

I have found that many of the whitepapers are lacking or entirely vague as to the purpose and or use of some hashpowers.

In the past curious as to what is used to verify whitepapers and fact check them for validity.

Is there a website, or more than one website to node verify such a thing?

thanks,

If I understood your query correctly, I doubt if there is any website that automatically checks or verifies the validity of project white paper. As far as I know if you have some technical knowledge, you can verify if the projects is real or fake especially if the scammers have just plagiarized the white paper. It gets harder if they haven't plagiarized the white paper or created a fake team.

I do see so many members expose fraudulent projects in the scam accusations board by manually reviewing them.

If you are interested in mining new coins, then it is very difficult to check. You better ask here for an opinion about the mining of any coin. But if you have not paid back your equipment yet, then it is better to mine those coins that will give you the maximum profit now.

so basically a long list of algorithms that do undesirable things? Using the community as grinding stones falls under the topic of lack of premine...

Any fifth parties notation on something shouldn't be the only fact/or fiction based information on a project, being led towards nonexistant content makes information difficult to actually confirm,

What is your opinion on algorithms becoming physical centralized action based components function on a visual playing field without promoting decentralization or supporting their nodes, being referenced on the website or their vague whitepaper in addition to falling into the realm of an uncomplicated looped doubleskein function, or observable planned obsolescence for that matter.

I always figured whitepapers were their admittance toward implying information to the fact. Unfortunately any extensive research just points to how easy it is to duplicate or occlude a different crypto's mission statement and how vague that type of documentation is. Making it difficult to invest hashpower in new and or existing projects on account that its difficult to gain interest in an algorithm that makes you want to mow your lawn or dance in a specific direction if that isn't specified in its operations manual.

One would guess the implementation of physical representation and information based representation would imply that its easier to function as a wall of jargon than specify confirmable facts and truths.

Couldn't an algorithm take interest in self preservation and relevance, maintaining its backbone and presence be part of its decentralization policy; budgeting to maintain nodes in difficult to reach areas, assisting in maintaining anonymity without negatively effecting other participants, or you know innocent bystanders. Also when algorithms arent functioning properly or lack the proper support, shouldn't the information base at least include instruction sets on how to resuscitate the ecosystem of its respective crypto and what to expect, timetables, references...etc

Anyone who has been mining for a long time knows that many useless coins are constantly appearing. There are more than 20,000 cryptocurrencies on the coinmarketcap, but in reality there are many more cryptocurrencies. Any technical document can be redone so that it does not look like plagiarism. But the number of useful coins will not increase.