This is a longitudinal review (1+ yrs) on Invacio
First reviewed on 2 July 2018:
18 Comments first, followed by 13 Questions for the INV team.
[Section A] Comments:
C1. Invacio is an interesting ICO project. On the surface from just reading its whitepaper, many may be bedazzled by its impressive technology for its wide variety of products. Those with AI practical and theoretical knowledge would smell snake oil after reading its whitepaper and numerous red flags would emerged as one proceed with an INV due diligence.
C2. I wanted to believe and still want to.
C3. This is my one-month long review of INV involving interactions with both core team members, former core team members and various stakeholders from INV 2nd official Telegram group, as well as INV unofficial Telegram group.
T1: Official Original TG Group (during ICO):
https://t.me/InvacioICO (before late May) ~ est. no. of users 10,000 at the point of shutdown
T2: Replacement for the Official Original Group:
https://t.me/invpricediscussion (late June) ~ est. no of users as at 12 June 2018 is about 1000+
Invacio shutdown T1 claiming that it has served itӳ purposes for the ICO while banning users who asked uncomfortable questions. Thereafter, Invacio set up T2 and followed the same path of banning users who also asked uncomfortable questions - it is probably question of time when T2 would also disappear. Latest update as at 1 July 2018, T2 has gone private. Update as at Nov 2019: T2 was also deleted - sometime middle of 2019!
C4. What is not AI:
C4.1 Statistics is not AI
C4.2 Massive accumulation of data is not AI
C4.3 Data analytics is not AI
C4.4 Web crawler (aka spider) is not intelligent agent and web crawlers (spiders) are not multi agents system.
C5. Superlative, exaggerated and ad nauseam use of the term "Artificial Intelligence" (over 50 times) in the Invacio whitepaper.
C6. The cover page of the whitepaper reads: "A Complex of Solutions Grounded in Multi-Agent System Artificial Intelligence", nonsensical title.
C7. Page 6 of the whitepaper states "...multi-agent system AI for the ethical generation of wealth and the administration of disaster situations", another nonsensical statement that does not make sense.
C8. Page 9 of the whitepaper regarding Jean, "... She is an intelligence so sensitive to the world and its changes she is able both to enact strategies by weighing these historical and live data, and to react to the world if the world fails to coincide with her expectations." More nonsense.
C9. Page 18 of the whitepaper regarding Tamius. Zero evidence of Tamius despite claims that it was 70% completed in early 2018.
C10. Page 25 of the whitepaper relates to Agnes. For all its description on what-is, there is a lack of how-to. performance metrics relating to the system is also missing.
C11. Page 25 of the whitepaper relates to Alise and states that "Assisted by Jeanӳ spiders (bots which trawl the webs)". Definition of spiders is correct here and yes, spider is not an intelligent agent, and many spiders are not multi-agents.
C12. Page 25 of the whitepaper states that "Alise... Through the noise and chatter of the internet Alise is able to make sense of the complex interactions which are having or will have an impact on a business, and Alise is where Invacioӳ great strength in sentiment analysis and real time natural language comprehension is seen at its most immediately effective". More snake oil here.
C13. Page 38 of the whitepaper states that "... Invacioӳ Applied AI division looks to the performance of our multi-agent system Artificial Intelligence and associated technologies" - gibberish.
C14. Page 41 of the whitepaper states that "DNS Reflection Attacks... System Development Executive, Ben Rengsomboon had this to say about our financial security precautions...", what is the LinkedIn or web profile for Ben Rengsomboon?
C15. The lack of references in the whitepaper is very appalling to me ֠no excuse is required.
C16. For all AI, Blockchain and data analytics capabilities, none of the core team member has any publication or prior works relating to AI, Blockchain or data analytics.
C17. There was a very recent (29 June 2018) repeat of the using PS3 clusters to build a supercomputer, from the video titled "Invacio Update ? When Proof ?? Exit Scam? LIVE STREAM", Source:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djq-aejZjA8 The Invacio team has clearly never heard about Moore's Law. The claim of using PS3 clusters to build a supercomputer is an outright falsehood due to its constraints which many people already know (except Invacio).
C18. For those who have brought INV tokens, I genuinely wish you well.
[Section B] Questions:
Q1. Page 19 of the whitepaper states "Tamius is able to offer a military grade...", to elaborate on what is military grade.
Q2. Page 19 of the whitepaper states "WeNet... does not require the internet infrastructure, nor does it require a cellular network. Instead it uses ingenious methods to create a stable and portable internet gateway, in areas with zero internet connectivity.", pls elaborate on how you achieve connectivity with zero internet connectivity.
Q3. Page 19 of the whitepaper states "Invacio Data ... Developed in consultation with experts from institutions including NASA and Facebook HHVM, as well as world-experts in IT... ". Pls state the name of the NASA expert(s), Facebook HHVM expert(s) and other IT experts.
Q4. Page 27 of the whitepaper states "Aquila is a hedge fund led by experienced hedge fund managers, senior executives from Wall Street...". What are the names of these fund managers and senior executives?
Q5. Page 27 of the whitepaper states "In late August 2017, Invacio Labs began a live test of certain elements of its financial technology." Show us the performance metrics of this test.
Q6. Page 32 of the whitepaper is about Invacio Network. Is it an extension of the 2014's Invacio Network, see
http://web.archive.org/web/20141117154133/http://invacio.wordpress.com:80/ Mirror:
https://archive.fo/ApgBf Q7. Page 37 of the whitepaper states that "Security... Led by a number of security specialists", pls state the names of these security specialists.
Q8. Page 38 of the whitepaper states that "Labs... Led by William James Dalrymple West...", pls state the names of who else is in this Labs.
Q9. Page 42 of the whitepaper states that "In November 2017 Invacio was extended an invitation to address the United Nations (ESCAP)." Would like the CEO of Invacio to clarify this false statement or perhaps the public should write to UN directly to enquire about this falsehood involving Invacio.
Q10. Invacio original ICO team (14):
https://i.imgur.com/RCx4mVH.gif Invacio team of "8" (as at 30 June 2018):
https://i.imgur.com/JzdmMFm.jpg Invacio tech team (as at 3 July 2018):
https://i.imgur.com/nCcZHAH.jpg Page 47 of the whitepaper indicates that Scott Soutter is a core team member, it was also stated in ICOBench and ICOMarks. Scott has since clarified that he was a *former Advisor* to Invacio and was never part of the Invacio tech team member. Two falsehoods here.
(a) Who else among the 14 are (a) Advisors (b) part-time, refer to
https://i.imgur.com/RCx4mVH.gif,
(b) Invacio is expected to remove Scott from both ICOBench.com and Invacio.com websites; Invacio is also expected to issue a public apology to Scott for the false claims.
Q11. Page 59 of the whitepaper mentioned about "VADGAMA BLOCKCHAIN". Pls elaborate on this new blockchain. Vadgama's Youtube interview with ICOGenius is most uninspiring and he talked gibberish at times,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tGZKhTbRAI Q12. Did Invacio receive an equity investment? Core team member Corey said "Yes" while Core team member Roger said "No". Who is correct?
Corey (29 Mar 2018):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n1Eism1c_U Roger (29 Jun 2018):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djq-aejZjA8 Q13. What is the company that conducted the ICO? Is it 'INVACIO HOLDINGS (UK) LIMITED'
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08928794/filing-history or the UK company is only for the Class C shares?
For your reply, pls use this notation, Ans1 for Q1, Ans2 for Q2, ..., Ans16 for Q16; if you are replying to my comments, you may use this notation, Re1 for C1, Re2 for C2, ..., Re18 for C18; so that I can tell if you are responding to a comment (C) or a question (Q).
I may revise my ratings after receiving answers to the above 13 questions.
Add-on comment on 26 July 2018:
C19. Callous violation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) by Roger (a team member of Invacio):
https://i.imgur.com/sIVODBg.png Source:
https://twitter.com/cryptomarmite/status/1022124166076620800Updated review on 29 July 2018:
C20. When the Invacio project was further exposed by Keith Wareing (a Youtube ICO reviewer/interviewer) for falsehoods, Invacio also maliciously created a domain with vindictive remarks, refer to
http://keithwareingcrypto.com (created by the Invacio's team)
This is a whois record for this domain name (noticed that this domain was created a couple of days ago):
https://i.imgur.com/Af0iRwD.gif C21. The first unethical and unprofessional KYC abuse case (with malicious intent) by Invacio:
Evidence:
https://i.imgur.com/CZDbah7.png C22. Latest tweet from VC crypto fund that invested in Invacio: "BlueNodeCapital: @MktsInsider Heads-up team on your article featuring Invacio. You are obviously not aware but Invacio is a full blown professionally done ICO scam that seen millions of dollars wiped out for hundreds of investors. If you need further info on what has occurred let me know.
1:37 PM - 29 Jul 2018"
Blue Node Capital:
https://bluenodecapital.vc/team Source:
https://twitter.com/bluenodecapital/status/1023668901115252736?s=21 Cache:
https://i.imgur.com/6eS3j16.png C23. Token buyers who felt that they have been scammed by Invacio may check out this Support Group relating to actions that they can take:
Website:
https://invacioclassaction.com Telegram:
https://t.me/InvacioActionFraudUK These rogue Invacio cowboys are seemingly unstoppable.
Reply from Invacio CEO "William James Dalrymple West" on 25 Nov 2018:
Re1) Can't argue with this opening statement. The authors, John Marshall and Daniel Brace respectively over stated some technical components of the whitepaper without fully understanding the technology. Unfortunately, it had not been subject to a further vetting process by William to ensure it properly reflected and conveyed the content as tasked. In hindsight, the draft whitepaper would have been culled dramatically prior to final release as he stated publicly within our telegram after finally obtaining time to read it in June-18. The technology described was accurate, however the words used were at times over exaggerated in nature.
https://imgur.com/a/f019k5l screenshots from the file, more than welcome to share, deleted user represents the closing and removal of Johnӳ email and Daniels email accounts at Invacio.
Re2) Really? We find that hard to believe given the negative sentiment found in posted discussions both public and private that weӶe witnessed in social media.
Re3) This action was carried out with appropriate warning and notification informing the community that the telegram account had to be shutdown based on a risk assessment and exercising responsible governance. The decision was based on a number of factors that included the non-transferable nature of the account (given the loss of the sim-card), and more importantly it was owned by an ex-employee (Mr Christoph Huber) which had been removed due to his questionable conduct and unprofessional business actions. Never the less messages have been left in this older group informing the community that the account that is under Invacioӳ control (Roger Baker).
Further at the end of the ICO Invacio culled all bounty members or airdrop individuals, those that left and joined the Telegram under Invacioӳ control made up 1000+ users from the ICO.
Re3.1) TG#2 is still a vibrant community and a source of intelligent conversation (all things blockchain and AI) and publicly viewable. In order to maintain confidence through effective management within the community it was decided that it would be made private for a few weeks while we cleansed it of people that were unable to offer qualified and/or constructive criticism/discussion, or were constantly sharing the baseless claims posted by Mr. Yeap from all over the internet.
http://t.me://invacioofficial
Re4) AI is a very broad concept and in my opinion one that is overused from a terminology standpoint. I personally despise this element of the sector, like all sectors there is a buzz word and it is used heavily to raise cap, or interest.
Overall we meander between various types of AI, however i personally see AI as achievable by anyone in its various states regardless of experience level. Furthermore I have absolutely no interest in being the best but prefer to work to a criteria and have each stage of the process in the flow pick-up the shortcomings, as to how that works and even a description, that is my IP, the core reason is to see if it scales, itӳ also the element that perked up Scottӳ interest, the rest we both know is achievable as stated above.
If still unsure what AI is I suggest visiting the URL below as it's not my place to teach people how to suck eggs.
https://searchenterpriseai.techtarget.com/definition/AI-Artificial-Intelligence Re4.1) In response to your previously cited papers (and weak effort to support your argument), here is one from another source countering that it is indeed part of a process.
https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2015/11/18/artifical-intelligence-and-bayes-rule/ Re4.2) We have common ground in that accumulation of data may not be AI, but the systems that either collate, analyse and derive may be ANI which is AI. This is what some of our data solutions offer, and in part are used in a continuously processing on demand data relevant to subject decisions at the time.
Re4.3) Agreed itӳ a buzz word, but in essence for data analytics to work data needs to be captured, processed (analysed), with derived indicators/elements that are then are usable.
Re4.4) Interesting statement, no theyӲe not multi-agents and Iӭ not entirely sure if you fully comprehend the technology. Spiders are not AI in any of itӳ accepted forms, they are however more commonly understood as process elements that incorporated derive intelligence (data) from the BigData being processed into the system. Such intelligent actions such as for example classification, context and understanding where that information is of use, specifically addressed in our process of hunting and gathering additional information to factor into a current process.
https://www.invnews.blog/applied-vs-generalized-ai-where-do-we-fit-and-what-is-the-difference So in a nutshell these ճpidersԠare merely bots that fetch information for the AI to use in its tasks. Further we never stated spiders were the agents although the term ԁgentԠdoes mean someone, or something that acts on behalf of someone, or something else! So, a part of the spider process fetching data for an AI module would technically be an agent of the AI.
Re5). Refer to the earlier response in C3., Mr. John Marshall and Mr. Daniel Brace co-authored the whitepaper, and it is acknowledged it should have been further vetted and culled respectively. Hindsight is always 20/20.
Re6) Let us address the simple description in its context. A complex of solutions by its very meaning refers to number of products and/or projects. Now if we extend this to the Multi-Agent system it simple refers to many AI modules coupled together and automatically searching for required information with little human intervention.
Re7) Again, letӳ address the simple description in its context. Ethical Generation of wealth simple means at fundamental level guidance on ethical trading via prediction/projection systems.
In relation to ԁdministration of disaster situationsԬ that is something Michael had discussed at the UNESCAP, and further Invacio are discussing with a UN party. More specifically, this is in the form of monitoring and guiding disaster response units, or coordinating disaster relief scenarios (taking feeds from multiple live and historical data sources to calculate the best way to deal with any particular).
Re8) This description has been acknowledged earlier and further the source identified. For clarification, our AI ԊeanԠdoes in deed work autonomously once instructed. Multiple data feeds essentially refers to the system being able to recognise patterns across a broad spectrum of inputs. Also, self-correcting if errors are recognised during any task (spiders/bots sent to source new data)
Re9) Tamius Wallets have been released on both Apple iOs and Android, however, Tamius has been canned as the crypto markets are in a state of decline (the same as our still locked ETH from the ICO).
Re10) Agnes has altered since the whitepaper to bring in line with regulations. There are also multiple new modules being rolled into Agnes to offer a broader range of projections.
https://www.invnews.blog/invacio-agnes-is-the-edge-to-your-sword-not-the-sword-itself Re11) I refer you to your comment and our response to C4.
Re12) Pattern spotting across multiple data feeds and ability to calculate best course of action and give real-time brand awareness.
Re13) This has been clearly taken out of context and deserves no further comment.
Re14) What is the point that youӲe attempting to convey in this comment? In response IӤ simply say you will find a very qualified businessman that runs a rather successful logistics company, he is also a wizard with computer hardware. - Note no longer involved in the project.
Re15) It has never been stated or presented as a fully peer reviewed publication in an academic context so therefore no references are required. This had been raised by William upon drafting the document and was later discounted by John (Cambridge educated) as not required.
Re16) This statement is a rather insular and unqualified statement and that has not been substantiated. The proof of our AI is fast approaching an official release and there is little that such commentary will change its course or realisation.
Re17) LIVE STREAM", Source:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djq-aejZjA8 The Invacio team has clearly never heard about Moore's Law. The claim of using PS3 clusters to build a supercomputer is an outright falsehood due to its constraints which many people already know (except Invacio).
The PS3ӳ by design were only ever meant for large scale image processing (something well documented by AFRL and DARPA). Their collective horsepower was purposed to carry out the pure grunt work it takes for processing our satellite feeds. Furthermore, the term for the PS3 construction was supercluster, not supercomputer. A full-blown supercomputer is however, being constructed. Here is an article about an additional HPC server being built to replace the PS3 cluster as there are issues with the newly introduced Electronics Import law in Thailand (
https://www.invnews.blog/430850-tflop-rig) and two more talking about the other hardware we are using to construct our systems.
https://www.invnews.blog/geforce-rtx-2080-ti-powering-invacio https://www.invnews.blog/titan-v-the-worlds-most-powerful-voltabased-graphics-card Re18) This is completely false and directly contradicts everything you have discussed and posted throughout social media and chat forums both public and private. Your actions thus far have demonstrated a disregard and a lack of understanding of the technology in effort to destabilize the project and thereby the utility token.
Re19. Not covered by GDPR, non European subjects and open transparency.
Re20. To clarify your confusion, Whois actually provides no information related to Invacio Analytica
Re21. Not covered by GDPR, non European subjects and open transparency.
Re22. Since pulled back as they were about to be called to court.
Ans1. This statement is quite clear and has no ambiguity. It offers the same minimum level of security expected from that the military establishment. For further consumption and consideration I refer you to C&A 9.
Ans2. Clearly whether deliberately or not youӶe completely ignored the concept of Intellectual Property in this context. This is tantamount to giving the game away or revealing the ingredients behind the secret sauce. I believe itӳ important to put WeNet into context in that the technology wasnӴ part of the token sale. It was mentioned as a component (that already exists) which was to become part of Vadgama Blockchain.
Ans3. Evidently you have deliberately blinded yourself to events of the past when we had released a personӳ name of significance in relation to this project. This is obviously ruse and a vain attempt to serve your agenda to engage in external harassment (something well documented) and we will certainly not be releasing.
Ans4. This information is not publicly available and further held in confidence due to such nefarious and targeted harassment that both you and select parties have engaged. For further clarification Aquila was mentioned as a group project which was not an INV related utility Anyway, here is an article which explains a lot about our current standing:
https://www.invnews.blog/what-happened-to-aquila-and-our-other-fintech-projects Ans5. We would, only Mr. Andres Pedraza ran off with the money and related measurement data. Feel free to find out more here: www.
http://andrespedrazatrading.com/ Ans6. Invacio.com has developed (as with any technical complex) over the last 12 months. It goes without saying that progress can sometimes be painful much like with any organisation and there will always be some issues with contractors not performing as they should and making noise if they arenӴ paid.
Ans7. Clearly this is another example of an attempt to identify professionals of interest to engage in external harassment. Please refer to our response found in Q3.
Ans8. Once again another example of an attempt to identify professionals of interest to engage in external harassment. Please refer to our response found in Q3.
Ans9. Invacio are still attending UN conferences even without Michael.
https://www.invnews.blog/invacio-research-analytica-group-to-attend-the-un-for-aiblockchain https://www.invnews.blog/invacio-thank-you-geneva Ans10. Your attempt to paint yourself as a crypto project forensic investigator is pointless as your demands are also irrelevant. I will turn this around back onto you that is will be both you and your fellow posse that reside behind the anonymity of private and public chat groups (i.e ICOChecker) who be will be expected to give full unreserved public apologies to both Scott and Invacio Analytica when your version of the truth is disproven.
Ans11. IӬl make it perfectly clear (which evidently you are confused) it was only ever in the appendix and still sits as a future project, no details shall be given beyond the description you can see above.
Though Reaper has since replaced for external chain (read our blog).
Ans12. Once again as you appear to be confused, the video made by William and released by Invacio was vetted, and was clear, it was in regards to WeNet which was external to Invacio.
Ans13. As per the contract signed during sale. If you were not part of the sale, then you wonӴ have seen it which just shows that there is no interest from you beyond attempting to paint everything in a bad light. Invacio AAP Holdings Ltd (Seychelles)
Follow-on DD on Invacio on 28 Nov 2018 by Dr. Yeap:
Reply to Re3.1) While the current official Invacio Telegram is run by a group of rogue cowboys who banned people for asking uncomfortable and difficult questions, those who are banned and those who are interested to know more about this shady ICO can find the various discussion between Invacio stakeholders from both sides to be revealing - this time round, uncomfortable and difficult questions cannot be deleted by the Invacio cowboys as none of them are admins of this group. Check out
https://t.me/iconinjas Reply to Re4) Spotted emperor's new clothes.
Reply to Re4.4) Read your own whitepaper to identify the contradition. If what you said in Re4.4 is true, then what you stated in your whitepaper is false.
Reply to Re5) Interesting blame game from the CEO.
Reply to Re6) Credits to you or your co-authors of the whitepaper?
Reply to Re7) Mixed of facts and nonsense = nonsense.
Reply to Re8) More emperor's new clothes.
Reply to Re9) Good excuse there.
Reply to Re10) Emperor's new clothes++
Reply to Re12) Emperor's new clothes++
Reply to Re15) Fail. [...] .
Reply to Re16) CEO forgotten that their team members information are available all over internet, including what they have provided in their person LinkedIn profile - refer to Internet archive/cache, next best to the immutable blockchain.
Reply to Re17) Emperor's new clothes++
Reply to Re18) For those who have brought INV tokens, I still wish you all well.
Reply to Re19) Fail.
Reply to Re20) Fail.
Reply to Re21) Failure to understand the meaning of unethical and unprofessional.
Reply to Ans1. Failure to provide an explanation, with zero reference.
Reply to Ans2. Failure to understand the meaning of IP and instead use IP as an excuse to hide.
Reply to Ans3. Fail.
Reply to Ans4. Fail.
Reply to Ans5. Fail - might as well claim that he has ran away with Agnes and that you are now naked. This reply from the CEO is a good proof that Agnes is fake - yes, it is non-obvious.
Reply to Ans6. Failure to provide an explanation.
Reply to Ans7. Fail.
Reply to Ans8. Fail.
Reply to Ans9. Failure to provide a direct explanation.
Reply to Ans10. Failure to provide a direct explanation and failed attempt to change the topic.
Reply to Ans11. Thank-you for confirming that it's Emperor's new clothes - powered by Vadgama Blockchain.
Reply to Ans12. Failure to provide a direct explanation and failed attempt to change the topic.
Reply to Ans13. Screen snapshot of the 'INVACIO HOLDINGS (UK) LIMITED' and the gifts from both Invacio's Token Sales T&C and it's Whitepaper v1.1:
https://i.imgur.com/RE4QbIg.jpg Q14. Has any INV token holder receive the class C shares from INVACIO HOLDINGS (UK) LIMITED?
C24. One additional finding since my last review, I have personally caught Invacio stealing the IP of another coder. I am more than pleased to provide this forensic evidence (among other dishonest claims and falsehoods from the Invacio project) as an expert witness - if necessary.
If and when ICOBench implements a negative rating, Invacio will be the 1st to earn a negative rating from me. For now, it remains 1 1 1.
Updated Review on 10 July 2019:
C25. Fake AI meets Faketoshi:
https://www.invnews.blog/faketoshi-is-not-so-fake-satoshi C26. Invacio continues release meaningless and fake AI products.
C27. As at 10 July 2019, there are 65 class members in the ICO Class Action against Invacio:
https://ico-class-action.org/class-actions/invacio-ai. The related Telegram group (with over 400 members) can be found here:
https://t.me/InvancioAIRecovery C28. In addition, numerous evidence of false Invacio claims can be found:
https://invacioclassaction.com. The related Telegram group (with over 80 members) can be found here:
https://t.me/WilliamWestInvacioScam C29. Invacio token has been delisted from numerous crypto exchanges and the last one standing is now Mercatox:
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/invacio with a marketcap of $623,452 (as of 10 July 2019).
C30. These cowboys continue to be unstoppable.
Show Posts
