Yes they can be, but should they be is really a question I’d like to see answered.
Your website is currently not displaying anything, all it shows me is a blue background but no images or text or links / menus are loading. It is literally just a blue page. I tried reloading it on several machines and finally got it to work, by this time I had already gone through the white paper so the website was basically a repeat of the white paper (or vice versa).
I was able to access the whitepaper through ICOBench, also did a quick scan of the team:
- None of the team have a link to their social media pages / LinkedIn
- This makes it hard to validate the team’s background and the team’s experience in both blockchain technology, ICOs and the medical field.
- A quick search on LinkedIn for a random selection from the team show none of the people have medical experience and none of the people listed had any affiliation listed with the Trufield project, this is a red flag. Are they really on this project or just a random selection of individuals from LinkedIN?
- All the people I checked (about 7) live in the UK, it’s hard to determine the claim from the white paper that they have first hand experience.
- The co founder and person with ‘presumed’ medical experience (Dr. Joseph Gbene) exists on LinkedIn but is not affiliated with the project.
- White paper:
- There is a total supply of 100,000,000 TRUF, this corresponds to 40M USD based on current ETH value
- Founders and advisors own 12% of total token supply, this seems high for a social project; especially given that this is a larger amount that what is allocated to user growth.
- 5,000,000 tokens are allocated for community and user growth, this seems extremely low given the fact that this system targets rural communities and communities that have a lack of or sporadic internet connection. Convincing people and health care providers to participate will require a gigantic effort, I don’t believe 5M tokens or 2M USD can cover this at all.
- There is a reserve of 1,000,000 tokens (or 400,000 USD) for bounties and referrals, this is OK for the size of the project but way to high in comparison to the community and user growth.
- The roadmap is overly aggressive, I highly doubt you can build the centralised storage system, the applications and the Ethereum components and fully test it in 5 months time. Especially since you are dealing with highly sensitive information. To start testing with selected entities (presumably medical care facilities) by March 2019 is highly unlikely.
- The advisors are nowhere to be found on social media and people with similar names are not associated with the project.
- The white paper talks about using ERC020 but doesn’t explain how it will be used. If you’re going to use ethereum ERC721 would have made more sense to me.
- The white paper only briefly touches on the overall structure.
- This statement isn’t really covered in the white paper, it does talk about potential advertising, which is understood to maintain the platform free of charge.
- How a user will be able to protect their data and allow access to their data is quite unclear.
I like the overall concept and the very real world problems it can solve.
I like the idea of using USSD, however the whitepaper refers to it as a Trufield unique protocol, which isn’t explained anywhere. USSD is not unique to Trufield.