I’m writing a book about Blockchain and why literally all of it is terrible garbage you shouldn’t go within a mile of. I probably won’t cover this one: Lunyr: Decentralized Wikipedia on the blockchain
There's a white paper. Now, I've been on Wikipedia since 2004, and I think I might know a thing or two about wiki communities and how they work, and what doesn't work and has failed dismally in the past. The subtitle of the paper is “A decentralized world knowledge base on Ethereum driven by economic incentives”. The idea is that Wikipedia with ads and micropaid contributors will definitely be something that could work, and never mind all the failed attempts to do such things in the past. It's a collection of bad ideas that have previously crashed in multiple cases, with no sign of awareness of the history of failed Wikipedia replacements.
All the people involved are blockchain bafflegab startup people, there's 0 with any background in education, Wikipedia or even content production. I see no evidence any of them have any idea what they're doing here.
Decentralized crowdsourced encyclopedia users rewarded knowledge base API artificial intelligence virtual reality augmented reality buzzword salad stop me before I blockchain again
The important bit is the ICO (Initial Premined Altcoin Offering) for their LUN token running on Ethereum. You use this to buy ads. Note that although they tout decentralised information as a key strength of Lunyr, the advertising is strictly centralised.
Jimmy Wales was less than impressed: “Buzzword salad. The whole idea is stupid . When all you have is a blockchain hammer, everything looks like a crypto-nail.”
Bloody Vox Day's attempted Wikipedia replacement is a less bad idea than this.
Update: Followup, six months later.