Every answer to the questions asked can be found in the whitepaper though, or in the faq on the website. And answered ad nauseum on bitcointalk, and on reddit, and in webinars/talks/youtube videos.
All the information is out there.
It seems only fair that if a person is truly interested in the technology and wants to point out flaws then they put in some effort towards understanding it before asking strangers on the internet to summarise a faq for them.
People are right to be sceptical otherwise. FCT is traded on margin, propagating false news or fud even if only for a few hours can truly reap rewards.
I think the community is incredibly helpful explaining things to most but that thread had a smell to it
Suggested reading: https://www.factom.com/about/faqs
Topic: Why I'm a Factom Skeptic "Marty jones" @reddit (Read 1530 times)
Not me but a guy named "Marty jones" @reddit posted this,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm open to a change of opinion, but have yet to find convincing evidence that Factom offers features that can't be accomplished solely with the Bitcoin blockchain, for only the cost of a Bitcoin transaction. This subreddit has a number of true believers who follow the company closely, so maybe one of you could show me what, if anything, I'm missing about Factom and why exactly the company demanded a +$20m valuation in it's most recent funding round.
Issues with Factom:
Stuffing a bunch of hashes of data into a merkle tree and outputting it on the Bitcoin blockchain is already possible today using OP_RETURN. Solutions such as Open Timestamps and Tierion already exist to this end; one of which is free.
32 federated servers and 32 audit servers using Proof of Authority to secure data entries will offer materially less security than the Bitcoin blockchain. Factom "chains" will be secured against tampering by no more than a few dozen servers at any time. Tamper prevention and reliably timestamped data entries are presumably the main goals of Factom's targeted customers; yet Factom adds nothing to those ends over what you get from using the Bitcoin blockchain.
The business model has no "moat" against competition. If it costs a customer 1/10th of a penny to make an entry using Factom, and the product is useful for some reason I've failed to see, a competitor will bring to the market a solution that costs 1/11th of a penny. A fierce competitor will elect not 32, but 33 servers to the federation, thereby "decentralizing" the product even further.
EDIT: I'm impressed with how quickly those in this thread stopped responding to my actual arguments in order to accuse me of trolling and market manipulation. Confirmation bias is strong in this community.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wont copy and paste what all people replyed, ill leave that to them.
A good project will have haters/doubters but this topic should bring more clarification about FCT.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm open to a change of opinion, but have yet to find convincing evidence that Factom offers features that can't be accomplished solely with the Bitcoin blockchain, for only the cost of a Bitcoin transaction. This subreddit has a number of true believers who follow the company closely, so maybe one of you could show me what, if anything, I'm missing about Factom and why exactly the company demanded a +$20m valuation in it's most recent funding round.
Issues with Factom:
Stuffing a bunch of hashes of data into a merkle tree and outputting it on the Bitcoin blockchain is already possible today using OP_RETURN. Solutions such as Open Timestamps and Tierion already exist to this end; one of which is free.
32 federated servers and 32 audit servers using Proof of Authority to secure data entries will offer materially less security than the Bitcoin blockchain. Factom "chains" will be secured against tampering by no more than a few dozen servers at any time. Tamper prevention and reliably timestamped data entries are presumably the main goals of Factom's targeted customers; yet Factom adds nothing to those ends over what you get from using the Bitcoin blockchain.
The business model has no "moat" against competition. If it costs a customer 1/10th of a penny to make an entry using Factom, and the product is useful for some reason I've failed to see, a competitor will bring to the market a solution that costs 1/11th of a penny. A fierce competitor will elect not 32, but 33 servers to the federation, thereby "decentralizing" the product even further.
EDIT: I'm impressed with how quickly those in this thread stopped responding to my actual arguments in order to accuse me of trolling and market manipulation. Confirmation bias is strong in this community.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wont copy and paste what all people replyed, ill leave that to them.
A good project will have haters/doubters but this topic should bring more clarification about FCT.
You should at least give the link to that discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/factom/comments/5f9t7t/why_im_a_factom_skeptic/
....he got answers, even from Brian Deery.
Not me but a guy named "Marty jones" @reddit posted this,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm open to a change of opinion, but have yet to find convincing evidence that Factom offers features that can't be accomplished solely with the Bitcoin blockchain, for only the cost of a Bitcoin transaction. This subreddit has a number of true believers who follow the company closely, so maybe one of you could show me what, if anything, I'm missing about Factom and why exactly the company demanded a +$20m valuation in it's most recent funding round.
Issues with Factom:
Stuffing a bunch of hashes of data into a merkle tree and outputting it on the Bitcoin blockchain is already possible today using OP_RETURN. Solutions such as Open Timestamps and Tierion already exist to this end; one of which is free.
32 federated servers and 32 audit servers using Proof of Authority to secure data entries will offer materially less security than the Bitcoin blockchain. Factom "chains" will be secured against tampering by no more than a few dozen servers at any time. Tamper prevention and reliably timestamped data entries are presumably the main goals of Factom's targeted customers; yet Factom adds nothing to those ends over what you get from using the Bitcoin blockchain.
The business model has no "moat" against competition. If it costs a customer 1/10th of a penny to make an entry using Factom, and the product is useful for some reason I've failed to see, a competitor will bring to the market a solution that costs 1/11th of a penny. A fierce competitor will elect not 32, but 33 servers to the federation, thereby "decentralizing" the product even further.
EDIT: I'm impressed with how quickly those in this thread stopped responding to my actual arguments in order to accuse me of trolling and market manipulation. Confirmation bias is strong in this community.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wont copy and paste what all people replyed, ill leave that to them.
A good project will have haters/doubters but this topic should bring more clarification about FCT.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm open to a change of opinion, but have yet to find convincing evidence that Factom offers features that can't be accomplished solely with the Bitcoin blockchain, for only the cost of a Bitcoin transaction. This subreddit has a number of true believers who follow the company closely, so maybe one of you could show me what, if anything, I'm missing about Factom and why exactly the company demanded a +$20m valuation in it's most recent funding round.
Issues with Factom:
Stuffing a bunch of hashes of data into a merkle tree and outputting it on the Bitcoin blockchain is already possible today using OP_RETURN. Solutions such as Open Timestamps and Tierion already exist to this end; one of which is free.
32 federated servers and 32 audit servers using Proof of Authority to secure data entries will offer materially less security than the Bitcoin blockchain. Factom "chains" will be secured against tampering by no more than a few dozen servers at any time. Tamper prevention and reliably timestamped data entries are presumably the main goals of Factom's targeted customers; yet Factom adds nothing to those ends over what you get from using the Bitcoin blockchain.
The business model has no "moat" against competition. If it costs a customer 1/10th of a penny to make an entry using Factom, and the product is useful for some reason I've failed to see, a competitor will bring to the market a solution that costs 1/11th of a penny. A fierce competitor will elect not 32, but 33 servers to the federation, thereby "decentralizing" the product even further.
EDIT: I'm impressed with how quickly those in this thread stopped responding to my actual arguments in order to accuse me of trolling and market manipulation. Confirmation bias is strong in this community.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wont copy and paste what all people replyed, ill leave that to them.
A good project will have haters/doubters but this topic should bring more clarification about FCT.
Jump to: