Consensus AI

Consensus is the open-sourced, decentralized artificial intelligence platform, powered by native cryptocurrency and built with the vision to improve the governance mechanisms at all levels of organizational structures.

About Consensus AI

Consensus AI aims to provide a method of democratic governance that utilizes artificial intelligence and electronic national identification (eIDs). SEN coins will be used as a reward for individuals that contribute data storage and computational resources to the Consensus AI network, as well as for participating in research projects and providing feedback data.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

2.4
Product
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

5.0
N/A
5 - General audience / mass market.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

2.0
N/A
2 - Quite a few / somewhat better competitors.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.

Product

Consensus AI’s target user base is the mass market. The project is quite ambitious, and aims to combine multiple sectors that are either emerging technologies or possess high levels of regulatory friction: AI, blockchain, and governance. For each of these components there are a number of comparable blockchain-related projects that are much more developed than Consensus. The GitHub page can be found via manual search and contains only one repository for the SEN token smart contract.

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

3.2
Use of Blockchain
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

3.0
N/A
3 - Automation; making something easier to do.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

3.0
N/A
3 - Potentially disruptive.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

4.0
N/A
4 - Token is essential to platform.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Mostly decentralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.

Use of Blockchain

SEN follows the ERC20 token protocol and was airdropped to individuals. It should be noted that Consensus, at the present time, does not plan to have a public sale for SEN tokens. The relationship between the ERC20 version of SEN tokens and the Sentient blockchain is not explicitly discussed (there is no guarantee that ERC20-based SEN tokens will be transferable once the Sentient blockchain is ready). It is stated that the Sentient blockchain will use “trusted nodes, verified with electronic national IDs” and be able to “execute smart contracts and perform machine learning on the network, powered by the miners and not controlled by a corporate entity”. As such, the need to create a custom token is evident.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

2.0
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient coverage.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

3.0
N/A
3 - Basic honesty with some hype.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is 32 pages in length. The technology plan is presented with low levels of detail. Consensus aims to develop their own blockchain solution (Sentient blockchain). However, specific details regarding the technology and how it compares with existing solutions is absent from the document. It is unclear how the Ethereum blockchain is used within the Consensus AI ecosystem since (ERC20-based) SEN tokens have already been airdropped to individuals. The business plan is presented with low levels of detail, as a public token sale is not planned at the current time. Furthermore, marketing and growth strategies are also not discussed. Thorough assessment of competitors is also absent. Overall, the whitepaper focuses on what the organization wants the platform to do, but does not provide sufficient discussion regarding the development strategy from both a technological and business perspective.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

2.2
Roadmap
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasibility

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

1.0
N/A
1 - Not-yet-available or questionable.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.

Roadmap

The development of the platform is divided into five stages: the Sentient blockchain (Genesis release), the research platform (Awakening release), the Consensus AI Advisor (Evolution release), enhancements to the AI Advisor (Unity release), followed by global adoption of the Consensus platform (Global Consensus). The level of detail provided for each release version is quite low – for example, the milestone regarding the upcoming Genesis release, which spans 1 year, is described in three bulletpoints: the launch of the Sentient blockchain, integration with electronic national IDs, and utilization of decentralized machine learning. The overall developmental roadmap extends past 4 years.

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

2.2
Compliance
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

3.0
N/A
3 - Partly; compliance not fully assured.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient or unprofessional.

Compliance

There is a short legal disclaimer at the end of the document that is approximately half a page in length. It is stated that SEN tokens “are not structured or sold as securities or any other form of investment product”. No further legal discussion is presented in either the whitepaper or the Consensus website.

Compliance Token Sale

Company and Team

2.4
Company and Team
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

2.0
N/A
2 - Initial stages of formation.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking in key areas.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat skewed.

Company and Team

The fairly small core team of 4 individuals is listed on the Consensus website, along with their profile pictures, short descriptions and links to social media profiles. All but one individual has had experience working in a technical position. One of the co-founders is concurrently a CEO for a different organization. Thus, considering the size of the team, the level of team commitment is questionable. There is a lack of individuals with extensive prior experience in blockchain-related projects.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

3.0
Token Sale
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some presence, lukewarm reception.

Token Sale

Based on a post on the Consensus blog (posted March 2018), the organization “will not have a public sale of tokens at the moment”. There was an airdrop for SEN tokens, where 20 million SEN were allocated to over 26,000 individuals over the span of 24 hours.

Product

Consensus AI’s target user base is the mass market. The project is quite ambitious, and aims to combine multiple sectors that are either emerging technologies or possess high levels of regulatory friction: AI, blockchain, and governance. For each of these components there are a number of comparable blockchain-related projects that are much more developed than Consensus. The GitHub page can be found via manual search and contains only one repository for the SEN token smart contract.

Category Breakdown
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nothing yet, just an idea.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

5.0
N/A
5 - General audience / mass market.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

2.0
N/A
2 - Quite a few / somewhat better competitors.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.
Product Score:
2.4

Use of Blockchain

SEN follows the ERC20 token protocol and was airdropped to individuals. It should be noted that Consensus, at the present time, does not plan to have a public sale for SEN tokens. The relationship between the ERC20 version of SEN tokens and the Sentient blockchain is not explicitly discussed (there is no guarantee that ERC20-based SEN tokens will be transferable once the Sentient blockchain is ready). It is stated that the Sentient blockchain will use “trusted nodes, verified with electronic national IDs” and be able to “execute smart contracts and perform machine learning on the network, powered by the miners and not controlled by a corporate entity”. As such, the need to create a custom token is evident.

Category Breakdown
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

3.0
N/A
3 - Automation; making something easier to do.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

3.0
N/A
3 - Potentially disruptive.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

4.0
N/A
4 - Token is essential to platform.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Mostly decentralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Use of Blockchain Score:
3.2

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is 32 pages in length. The technology plan is presented with low levels of detail. Consensus aims to develop their own blockchain solution (Sentient blockchain). However, specific details regarding the technology and how it compares with existing solutions is absent from the document. It is unclear how the Ethereum blockchain is used within the Consensus AI ecosystem since (ERC20-based) SEN tokens have already been airdropped to individuals. The business plan is presented with low levels of detail, as a public token sale is not planned at the current time. Furthermore, marketing and growth strategies are also not discussed. Thorough assessment of competitors is also absent. Overall, the whitepaper focuses on what the organization wants the platform to do, but does not provide sufficient discussion regarding the development strategy from both a technological and business perspective.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient coverage.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

3.0
N/A
3 - Basic honesty with some hype.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

1.0
N/A
1 - Severely lacking.
Whitepaper Score:
2.0

Roadmap

The development of the platform is divided into five stages: the Sentient blockchain (Genesis release), the research platform (Awakening release), the Consensus AI Advisor (Evolution release), enhancements to the AI Advisor (Unity release), followed by global adoption of the Consensus platform (Global Consensus). The level of detail provided for each release version is quite low – for example, the milestone regarding the upcoming Genesis release, which spans 1 year, is described in three bulletpoints: the launch of the Sentient blockchain, integration with electronic national IDs, and utilization of decentralized machine learning. The overall developmental roadmap extends past 4 years.

Category Breakdown
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasibility

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

3.0
N/A
3 - Optimistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

1.0
N/A
1 - Not-yet-available or questionable.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

1.0
N/A
1 - Nowhere yet.
Roadmap Score:
2.2

Compliance

There is a short legal disclaimer at the end of the document that is approximately half a page in length. It is stated that SEN tokens “are not structured or sold as securities or any other form of investment product”. No further legal discussion is presented in either the whitepaper or the Consensus website.

Category Breakdown
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

3.0
N/A
3 - Partly; compliance not fully assured.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient or unprofessional.
Compliance Score:
2.2

Company and Team

The fairly small core team of 4 individuals is listed on the Consensus website, along with their profile pictures, short descriptions and links to social media profiles. All but one individual has had experience working in a technical position. One of the co-founders is concurrently a CEO for a different organization. Thus, considering the size of the team, the level of team commitment is questionable. There is a lack of individuals with extensive prior experience in blockchain-related projects.

Category Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

2.0
N/A
2 - Initial stages of formation.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking in key areas.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat skewed.
Company and Team Score:
2.4

Token Sale

Based on a post on the Consensus blog (posted March 2018), the organization “will not have a public sale of tokens at the moment”. There was an airdrop for SEN tokens, where 20 million SEN were allocated to over 26,000 individuals over the span of 24 hours.

Category Breakdown
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some presence, lukewarm reception.
Token Sale Score:
3.0

Use this code to share the ratings on your website