Author: flowie, ChainCatcher

Recently, a new betting platform called factCheck has launched its mainnet on the Base chain. Unlike Polymarket, which focuses on predicting future events, factCheck concentrates on betting on the truthfulness of facts that have already occurred.

FactCheck describes itself as a fact-checking market that uses financial incentives and artificial intelligence to combat fake news.

According to factCheck's founder, Prithvir Jhaveri, he hopes that factCheck will become a place for users to share new information, envisioning it as a future investigative news platform that combines "WikiLeaks + Internet capital markets."

Investment from AllianceDAO and the Background of the factCheck Team

According to RootData, factCheck has received investment from AllianceDAO.

Currently, the only publicly disclosed team member is founder Prithvir Jhaveri, who graduated from Duke University and is a serial entrepreneur with a background in finance and AI.

Prithvir Jhaveri previously worked as an analyst at JPMorgan, then as a product manager at an AI company, and also worked at a Silicon Valley incubator called Z Fellows.

From Prithvir Jhaveri's Twitter, it appears that factCheck's predecessor was a platform for crypto asset management and intelligence analysis called Loch.one.

Loch.one provided real-time on-chain data analysis tools, allowing users to track wallet addresses, monitor asset performance, and get updates on new tokens. Additionally, Loch.one had previously created a fact-checking betting market.

Loch.one now seems to focus solely on the fact-checking betting market and has established the new brand factCheck.

The Loch.one website directly guides users to factCheck. Prithvir Jhaveri has not yet mentioned the reason for the shift in business focus.

How to Use AI + Crypto to Combat Fake News?

Combating fake news is not a new business model. In the traditional realm, a large number of such websites emerged around the year 2000.

The non-profit fact-checking website FactCheck.org, which shares the same name as factCheck, was established in 2003 and has gained considerable international recognition. FactCheck.org has won multiple Webby Awards for exposing deception and lies by public officials.

However, these fact-checking websites also face some pain points.

First is the revenue model; they primarily rely on foundation donations, corporate sponsorships, and individual contributions. However, depending on this external funding model may raise public doubts about their independence and objectivity.

Second, the scope and methods of investigation are limited. Most influential fact-checking websites focus on the political realm, and their investigation and verification methods or sources are often singular, relying on journalists and researchers or a crowdsourcing model.

Third, the results of the verification can be controversial. For example, judgments on certain complex issues may contain subjectivity. Especially on politically sensitive topics, their verification results may be questioned by individuals from different political factions. Additionally, when dealing with verifications involving scientific or technical issues, they may lack sufficient expertise and authority.

FactCheck essentially moves traditional news verification onto the blockchain, using Crypto to record the verification process, ensure transparency, and incentivize participants, while employing AI to accelerate the efficiency of news verification.

Prithvir Jhaveri mentioned that a trustworthy neutral AI Agent can automatically browse the web for evidence. If users disagree with the AI's verification results, they can provide compelling evidence to persuade them.

Prithvir Jhaveri believes that under this model, creating or joining a fact-checking market takes only a few seconds, and due to the transparency of results, accountability is increased by 100 times. Furthermore, without verifiable evidence, it is impossible to manipulate the system; every claim is a fair competition for the truth.

However, whether AI can truly achieve accurate verification of news authenticity still requires time to validate. Moreover, compared to Polymarket's predictions on specific future events, the verification of news authenticity, which is inherently more subjective, may lead to greater controversy.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。