The IOTA vision explained in 2 minutes

The Tangle Vs. Blockchain Explained

Interview with David Sønstebø

Semmelweis-Reflex, Subjectivism and Mob Mentality. IOTA fighting Goliath’s in this War of Blockchains.

Semmelweis-Reflex, Subjectivism and Mob Mentality. IOTA fighting Goliath’s in this War of Blockchains.

Do you think you’re a critical thinker who’s smarter than those who define the rules of this shark-pond of crypto-currencies, and smarter than those who spread the lies (you’re already convinced of) in the first place?

Then you defy subjectivity and basic functions of the human psyche. Good for you.

If not, you may want to read my thoughts about what is happening here.

Let’s make a game out of your ability to distinguish between truth and lies. After you read this blog post, you go out and look for lies in articles and videos. It’s pretty easy.

Disclosure: I’m invested in IOTA, but the difference to those I mention here is: I never attack other projects or people, I just defend IOTA.


The daily routine. I get up, brush my teeth, make coffee, read social media. And then I correct lies about IOTA.

Lies and insults that originate not only from unknown trolls but also from renowned academics.

Well-known online magazines stir up hatred and process old news from which IOTA cured itself months ago.

But how can this be?
What are we missing here?
Is IOTA a scam?
Or do we see other forces at work, which seem surreal given the fact that many of those lies are presented by would-be solid sources?

I have made it my business to correct these lies and -out of context information- that can be read every day.

Every weekend I hold English and German podcasts on youtube and I present all the facts with their primary sources. This is a fundamental requirement, because we are not in a hip area but in a highly complicated, sensitive and not always easy to understand innovation river-delta, which not only wants to replace the sea of legacy systems with fresh water, but also has to ensure that it is not brackish water that it’s creating. This whole ecosystem was created in order to be an improvement, not a burden.

From the continent of crypto-currencies, several rivers are flowing into the technological ocean.

IOTA postulates to be the first clean, sustainable, fresh sweet water river, so naturally, other streams are unsatisfied and contaminate it as much as they can. And there are many.

Time to draw a line.

This habitus of mine has evolved over the past 18 months. Uncover lies, expose liars, present primary sources.

Of course, that’s not the only thing that has developed.

IOTA continues to bring good news, collaborations and reasons to put it above a level of Bitcoin when it comes to the question: which project is more legit?

At this point, the minds are divided, but IOTA has an advantage in this regard.

IOTA, or better the Foundation as the supportive organisation is registered and recognised as a charitable foundation in Germany.

Of course, we have already seen unimaginable things. It could be possible that a scam could overcome even the highest legal organs in a highly developed country like Germany. There could also be an alien under your bed right now.
IOTA, however, has been in focus since the beginning of its development and had to prove itself against countless windmills and Goliath’s.

Which in this world only works with transparency, a lot of work and confidence building.

The alleged vulnerability in August 2017 has been a major publicity stunt in order to besmirch IOTA. No funds were ever at risk and the problem was no problem. Cold coffee.

Therefore, let’s take a look at the questions that really matter.

Who are the accusers?
How exactly does IOTA counter the accusations?
What exactly can end the discussion?

When I used the image of David against Goliath, I should have used Alfred Wegener against the establishment.

The continental drift is one of the basic scientific facts, everyone has agreed upon.

When Alfred Wegener postulated his results of research back in the early 1910’s, the scientific dinosaurs rejected his theory until the late 1950’s and he faced constant resistance as long as he was living. Part of that was that he described the continental drift slightly wrong (continental borders vs shorelines), another part was that the renowned geologists didn’t want to accept this new paradigm as they would lose their credibility.

The discussion reached a deadlock until he died in 1930 in Greenland. In the early 1960’s, researchers found evidence that he was indeed right and accepted his theory posthumously.

This is fairly different to today’s landscape. Today we have angry Twitter discussions, ad hominem and kardashian’esque behaviour even in scientific circles.

Today, we live in an interconnected world. Scientific results, opinions, and reactions are just one tweet away and we can support our claims with computers, and the global community of scientists and skilled autodidacts can participate when sensitive topics are discussed.

Three things, however, never changed.

First: The ability of the human psyche to stick to the opinion of the majority. Bandwagoning works and is rarely a choice of free will.

Second: Scientists still hate to lose their credibility.

As a result, the Semmelweis-reflex kicks in and hinders progress. From Wikipedia: “The Semmelweis reflex or “Semmelweis effect” is a metaphor for the reflex-like tendency to reject new evidence or new knowledge because it contradicts established norms, beliefs or paradigms.”

A third reason that changed the behaviour of scientists changes also the whole discussion. I come to that at a later point. The cold coffee first.

In August 2017, IOTA fell victim to a coordinated attack that did not aim to protect people, provide technical assistance, or prevent a scam. No.
It was undoubtedly a plot of upsetting the research community against IOTA, so that it would suffocate in the strong headwind. Due to relentless work, clarification and presentation of facts, the headwind was reduced to a point where it’s merely a nuisance, but right now, as the biggest industrial fair, the Hannover Messe is happening, it starts to gain strength again as many magazines and “scientists” remind everyone how “bad” IOTA really is. Without facts, just via mob mentality. What a coincidence.

There are many rivers that form a delta and want to disrupt the sea of legacy systems.

Some rivers are larger, some smaller. A few are there for a long time and had to move mountains to reach the sea, and some are dirty.
The majority of rivers are held back due to technological dams.
There are even rivers that were never aiming to flood the ocean, just a private pond.
And many former whitewater are running dry these days.
There is much to win, and much to lose.
Everyone has skin in the game when it’s about money.

Who are the accusers?

Summarized: I didn’t find any accuser that is not invested in Bitcoin, Ethereum or connected projects like Zcash. Every single source is a dirty river that is looking to get the majority of the technological ocean. There is not even a single exception!
These people are not interested in an open and fair debate in order to support progress, they are solely protecting their money.

-The Digital Currency Group behind Coindesk.

-Cointelegraph (CEO Victoria Vaughan is an ex-Angel investor with Bitcoin)

-The Digital Currency Initiative, DCI, which is part of the MIT. Conflict of Interests.

-Assistant Prof. of Johns Hopkins Private University, Prof. Matthew D. Green. Conflict of Interest

-Countless Bitcoin Maximalists such as Andreas Brekken Conflict of Interest, Richard Heart or even Andreas M. Antonopoulos that jumped on the bandwagon to hate IOTA after the wrong allegations.

-Former Forbes/Nasdaq/Coindesk contributor Amy Castor. COI1  COI2 COI3 (paid by venture capital company), (writing in favour of Bitcoin), (writing how to buy Zcash – she was also part of Zcash ad-campaign)

-Ethereum Core Dev Nick Johnson.

-Bitcoin Core Dev Peter Todd

-Dozens of Cryptographers that are either falling prey to the Semmelweis reflex or supporting their colleagues with mob mentality.

The third point is: Cryptographers, magazines owned by venture capital companies such as Coindesk or Cointelegraph have a monetary interest in promoting the systems they invested in.

This scientific discussion shifted into an economic discussion.

Remember this whenever you read articles in the crypto-sphere: These are not the actions of independent scientist or magazines, these are the actions of the textbook homo oeconomicus that is acting as a rational agent to increase his financial situation and level of influence.

How exactly does IOTA counter the accusations?

IOTA countered allegations in several ways.

  1. Open letters to everyone where they explain that at no point funds were at risk. Fact is: No one lost money except due to the price-collapse after the DCI-allegations.
  2. Transparency compendium (before the irresponsible disclosure of the DCI)
  3. The official response to the DCI allegation
  4. Security Audit of the allegedly flawed cryptographic scheme curl-p by Cybercrypt
  5. Setting up of a Non-profit organization under German law
  6. Collecting a team of scientists that research the Tangle
  7. Under the advisors are also advisors with international reputation:

    -Dr. Rolf Werner – Head of Fujitsu Europe
    -Johann Jungwirth – CTO of Volkswagen
    -Hongquan Jiang – Robert Bosch VC
    -Prof. Gur Huberman – Columbia Business School
    -Prof. Joachim Taiber – CTO of the International Transportation Innovation Center


What can end the discussion?

The answer is short: Building trust.

The IOTA Foundation has two very important processes in place that are nearly completed.

1) the Curl-p peer review by Cybercrypt

2) the peer review of the trinity wallet of the Accessec GmBH

Apart from that, there are developments behind the curtains that are also very important to form a practical version of IOTA vision.

Equilibria in the Tangle‘ is the fundamental and necessary research that is researching consensus, good and bad actors in the Tangle. This research is done by Dr.Serguei Popov, Olivia Saa, and Paulo Finardi

The confirmation timings are researched by Bartosz Kuśmierz

All research around IOTA can be found here: Link

 


To draw a conclusion:

IOTA has become a transparent project that is actively researching and developing in lightspeed.

It’s regulated under German law and it’s solving the scalability and fee-issues of common Blockchains. Naturally not everyone likes this project because it ends the mining centralization of Bitcoin and others.

People follow their investment, scientists are people.

In the end, critical minds and critical investors decide if they believe biased sources that besmirch IOTA on every occasion or if they stick to official sources, transparency and global companies that decided to use IOTA over other blockchain/DLT projects.

Countless companies such as Fujitsu, Volkswagen or Bosch are working with IOTA.

Latest results were shared on the Hannover Messe 2018:

Featured Image: India Today

2 Replies to “Semmelweis-Reflex, Subjectivism and Mob Mentality. IOTA fighting Goliath’s in this War of Blockchains.”

  1. Thank you for this brilliant, fair, level-headed article. I love how you resolutely fight the smear campaign with actual facts and sources while not stooping to ad hominen attacks–you have stayed out of their playing field and kept the high ground! I feel bad for how many people are being kept from the truth by deceitful articles, but in the end the truth will prevail.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *