Since Sota closed the discussion after my last message, I’m reopening this thread to urge the new council to take decisive action based on the fraud Leo has consistently perpetrated through dApp staking. As stated in the Community Council’s guidelines:
“The Council can unregister a dApp from dApp staking if necessary. A 4/5 majority agreement is required for additional scrutiny and consensus.”
It’s easy to mislead people on Twitter with marketing buzzwords and flashy diagrams, especially when most users don’t have the technical expertise to see through the façade. However, for those of us who do, Leo’s claims regarding Nerox AI raise glaring red flags.
If Leo is genuinely building an AI model capable of emotional intelligence, real-time multimodal interaction, and empathetic responses without leveraging state-of-the-art tools like ChatGPT, let alone foundational frameworks from OpenAI, Microsoft, or Hugging Face, then it’s time for him to provide hard evidence. Here’s the challenge:
Key Questions Leo Must Address
- Proprietary AI Development
• You’ve claimed to not rely on foundational models like GPT. Can you prove this? What is your custom NLP framework, and how does it work?
• If you’re not using ChatGPT or similar tools, explain why Azure AI Foundry is being name-dropped without providing architectural specifics.
- Benchmarks and Performance
• Where are the benchmarks comparing your model’s performance to existing state-of-the-art NLPs?
• Can you provide real-world demos-sources, or are these just mockups made to convince non-technical audiences?
- Technical Infrastructure
• What infrastructure are you using for training and inference? GPUs? TPUs? How do you achieve real-time performance for emotional and facial analysis at scale?
• Are you using third-party APIs for transcription, emotion analysis, or face detection? If so, isn’t this just wrapper work being sold as “innovative AI”?
- Training Data and Methodology
• What training dataset powered this groundbreaking innovation? Was it proprietary, or did you depend on publicly available datasets?
• How are you addressing bias and fairness in facial and emotional recognition areas notorious for their inherent flaws?
- Transparency and Open-Source Contributions
• Why isn’t there a public repository (e.g., GitHub) to validate your claims of innovation? Open collaboration fosters trust.
• Are any components of Nerox AI open-source, or is everything locked away to avoid scrutiny?
Fraudulent Patterns in dApp Staking
Beyond the technical questions, let’s not forget the core issue here: Leo’s dApp staking activities have consistently demonstrated manipulative practices designed to extract funds without delivering tangible value. His Twitter posts serve as distractions, yet they fail to address the lack of transparency, accountability, and measurable results in his projects.
The council must act swiftly to protect the ecosystem from further exploitation. Leo’s refusal to answer these questions previously speaks volumes about his intentions. If his claims cannot stand up to scrutiny now, it’s the council’s responsibility to unregister his dApp from staking and uphold the integrity of the platform.
Transparency isn’t optional, it’s essential. We demand answers, not more marketing fluff.
Happy New Year 2025!