Ellcrys (ELL) ICO Review

Click here to view website

Ellcrys is a decentralized social networking platform that is putting users privacy and satisfaction as its first priority. It is an innovative approach towards transparent and independent means of user data ownership, reward on ads and free of speech. It is the first get paid to content creation and sharing ecosystem that leveraged OCR token payments for its reward system.

Essential Information

Ico TimeUnknown – Unknown
Token NameEllcrys
Token SymbolELL
WhitepaperView Whitepaper
Website LinkHome
Price1 ELL = 0.2 USD
Minimum investment0.15 ETH

More about Ellcrys (ELL) ICO:

Ellcrys lets anyone, anywhere in the world to co-create, co-own and co-govern software products, services and organizations without relying on a centralized authority.

Open source collaborators are empowered to start or contribute to communities dedicated to creating community-run software products and services using a source code sharing and collaboration technology that is open, decentralized, fault-tolerant and censorship-resistant.

Ellcrys offers a decentralized git hosting system that enables developers to store and share codes that cannot be censored or abruptly destroyed. It also provides an ownership layer that allows thousands of people to share ownership of software applications (like mobile apps, web applications, REST APIs, libraries, frameworks, desktop apps, etc.). On Ellcrys, collaborators are empowered to govern themselves through the provision of tools that allows them to create simple to the complex governance system.

Ellcrys also features a virtual machine that allows collaborators to create blockchain applications or DApps using established languages like JavaScript, Go, C++ and more.

We are building the technology that will provide the platform and tools to enable communities build organisations that are open, transparent, self-governed and co-owned by members who are able to manage shared resources whilst being able to compete with centralised organisations.

The shift towards community-driven services spearheaded by open source communities is already happening in the cryptocurrency industry which is worth over $176 billion as at the time of writing this whitepaper, and it is the most prominent pioneer in the creation, incentivization and governance of systems that are created in the open with publicly disclosed mission and ethical standards. Projects like Bitcoin and Ethereum have a large community of participants who regularly hold administrators and core developers accountable to the standards they have publicly championed. If we intend to derive benefits from open source services quickly, then the tools and ideologies that make these communities successful must be adapted for communities building centralised applications which are undoubtedly the most accessible, convenient and faster than their decentralised versions. By adopting the open and collaborative structure of open source to centralised systems, making their development, governance and executions more transparent and accountable, we make it easy for communities composed of mostly mutually distrustful collaborators to build all kinds of applications (desktop, mobile, VR) together and integrate any business model like centrally-run organisations. However, for us to realise a future where open source services compete with centrallyled services, we need to find and fix the challenges and obstacles that may produce failures.

2. Obstacles Of Open Source Services

A host of infrastructural inadequacies challenge the dream of communityled open source software services directly solving end-user problems with the same infrastructure and support that centrally-governed organisations enjoy. In this section, we describe some of the significant issues we believe to be most worrying.

2.1 Collaboration Tools & Platforms

Open source developers are distributed across the world. They speak different languages, have different beliefs and live in different timezones, but these differences have not slowed down the progress of the OSS community. Most developers contributing to open source projects today use a distributed version control system (DVCS). These tools provide a common development protocol that collaborators use to contribute and manage a codebase. Most developers make use of the Git[2] to share, track, package and version their contributions. Git is a distributed version control system developed in April 2005 by Linus Torvalds to aid the development of the Linux kernel. It has since grown to be one of the most important tools utilised by developers and enterprises across the world. Git allow developers to work in a decentralised approach where they manage replicated source code repositories, contribute and resync with other developers. Unfortunately, running and maintaining independent git servers is challenging for most users Requires understanding of some networking, good internet, high-availability, server cost if hosted on the cloud. For this reason, cloud-based code hosting services like Github[3] emerged to provide users with a service that host repositories, thereby eliminating the need for users to run and maintain personal servers. These services also provide additional collaboration utilities like issue tracking, reviews, pull request that enable users to communicate problems and manage new releases of their software. Millions of developers use Github and other code sharing platforms to build great software, but the central ownership, governance tools optimised for authoritarianism and execution of the service make it unfit to host community-owned open source services.

2.2 Shortcomings of Centralized Code Sharing Platforms

In this section, we highlight some of the reasons why centralised code hosting platforms are unsuitable for building true communityled, shared enterprises.

2.2.1 Censorship

Code is free speech; similar to human languages, it is a form of expression used to communicate ideas; This has been proven in a U.S court [4] in the case between Bernstein v. the United States where Bernstein wanted to publish a paper and source code of his encryption system [5]. However, the government required him to submit his ideas for review and register to acquire a license as an arms dealer, and failure to do so would result in criminal penalties. Bernstein sued the government and won when it was ruled that the First Amendment protected software source code. However, not many countries have laws that recognise code as free speech. As a result, code sharing platforms are exposed to request and demands from governments to censor projects created by individuals of interests. It is not news that Github continues to face threats and attacks from governments[6] who want repositories removed. While code sharing platforms face a real threat from external and hostile actors, these services themselves can also exert censorship actions upon users and their projects according to predetermined or arbitrary terms which are mostly driven by their business models. Additionally, not only are users exposed to censorship behaviours incited by external agents and the code sharing platform, but they are also vulnerable to censorship by project admins or maintainers. Project maintainers are free to cut access to a repository they manage at any time and on their terms. The various levels of censorship threats make centralised code sharing platform unsuitable for hosting communities building innovative, competitive and possibly contentious applications and services. As long as contributions are hosted centrally, repositories continue to remain under potential threat.

2.2.2 Ownership

Most tools and services on the internet support a single owner account architecture. An architecture that recognises and grants ownership and authority to one person identified by their email or phone number. Some of the motivation for this is the need to maintain security and to determine who pays the bills. Code sharing platforms are among these service providers built on this single-owner structure. All repositories must be owned and managed by one person who is granted full privileges to create, access, add members and destroy any resource associated with their account without notice. The consequence of this is that complicated, sovereign and community-led organisations cannot build software in a trust-less manner since these collaborators must trust the root account owner. One approach employed to remedy this problem involves the creation of committees and other secondary structures. However, we argue that these structures do not deliver real ownership and governance since there is a root password managed by an individual or organisation. In the crypto industry, they say If you do not own your private keys, you do not own the coins. Likewise for open source projects on a code sharing platform, If you do not own the password, you do not own the project. It is essential that contributors to community-led platforms can honestly and provably share ownership of a project without needing to trust a central authority such as the owner or maintainer of a repository or the platform operator. Real ownership of a community-owned software cannot be granted based on faith that the authority will always act in the best interest of collaborators.

2.2.3 Immutability

The concept of immutability in computing refers to the unchanging, unalterable state of data. It refers to the inability of a piece of data to be altered. Immutable data is easy to reason about; We can make assumptions and build on top of them with certainty that their state will not change unexpectedly. Interestingly, the Git version control system used by millions of collaborators and supported by most code sharing platforms utilises an immutable data structure. Git includes concepts like branches and commits; Commits are backwards-linked collections of changes that exist inside a branch. Collaborators can begin working from any commit and never have to worry that future commits may alter the state of the commits they are extending. However, code sharing platforms do not guarantee immutability of an entire repository. Repositories as a whole are not immutable; Their owners or the platform operators can delete them. It is important to note that the ability to delete repository can serve as a tool for censorship. An account owner or platform operator can prevent people from collaborating by removing a repository from existence. Although repositories can be cloned easily, it is more challenging to re-organise a community disrupted by an act of censorship. The lack of guaranteed immutability on code sharing websites makes them unappealing for hosting community-led services. It will be devastating for a community to one day find their shared enterprise deleted by the account owner or platform operator.


In addition to reviewscenter.net will try to provide their observations and make the best review here. But this monitoring is not complete without your comments, messages and reports. So post your comments on the investment system provided at the end of each post or email reviewscenter.net@gmail.com


reviewscenter.net is not a financial and investment system and it never enter into the investment services’s area.
Our main task is to provide the correct payment for hyips and their related data.
reviewscenter.net has no responsibility for your investments.
Do your investment with more observation and investigation.

Ellcrys (ELL) ICO Scam or Not?

Read articles you may want:

everything a beginner needs to know

how to start investing in bitcoins