Everipedia, a soon-to-be Wikipedia rival has secured 30 million dollars in funding from Mike Novogratz-led crypto merchant bank, Galaxy Digital, claims Business Insider. If you haven’t heard much about this platform in the recent period, it’s a Wikipedia wannabe that was announced back in 2015. And in case you have started to confuse it with just yet another digital encyclopedia, you should know that there’s more to the story.
Everipedia, aims at building a decentralised knowledge base, unlike Wikipedia. Now, what does that mean? To give a background, platforms like Wikipedia and Facebook operate from a central server. Wikipedia, for that matter, in spite of being peer-to-peer in nature, has all their scattered pieces stored in a common location. That’s probably the biggest and only differentiator when it comes to Everipedia, and their recent funding rang a bell right away.
Mike Novogratz’s recent 30 million dollars funding helps Everipedia reach the bells and whistles of blockchain technology. Yes, it’s the same technology that powers Bitcoin and several other cryptocurrencies. Their plan revolves around airdropping digital tokens that are meant to serve as the backbone of Everipedia. You may find these terms confusing, but keep reading and you will get an idea.
The whole function of Everipedia will be based on EOS blockchain software. EOS is another digital currency whose holders shall be airdropped digital tokens. These tokens will then be used to make entries and edits to Everipedia articles. Users need to put up some token before proposing any changes. This way, one can expect content quality to be maintained and fake news posters are kept away.
If the proposed changes are approved, users get all their tokens back and earn extra. Similarly, if approved edits are deemed false or not helpful, editors lose their tokens. So, you must have figured out by now that it’s a pure for-profit initiative based on a give and take policy. That’s how Wikipedia is decentralised and undemocratic, according to Everipedia co-founders Theodor Forselius and Travis Moore who spoke with VatorNews.
But this raises a few concerns. Since money is involved here, how effective is Everipedia going to be in the long run? Who will decide what can be deemed wrong for the community? Because at the end of the day, we can’t ignore the possibility of users going to extreme lengths just to earn some easy money out of greed. Whatever be the case, we can’t be so sure about Everipedia to become a true Wikipedia rival until these basic questions are answered.