Why Are We So Persistent in That 'Laborious and Unrewarding' Data Cleaning?

marsbitPublicado a 2026-01-24Actualizado a 2026-01-24

Resumen

In the article "Why Are We So Committed to 'Labor-Intensive and Unrewarding' Data Cleaning?", the RootData team reflects on their second bounty event, which focused on enhancing data transparency in Web3. The event involving over 140 participants resulted in 1,220 submissions, with 564 valid data points approved—a 46.2% acceptance rate. Key improvements included identifying key team members from projects like MOMO.FUN and Subhub (often not publicly listed), correcting inaccuracies in token unlock details and TGE timelines, and updating outdated information such as misattributed founders and deprecated social accounts. The author emphasizes that ensuring data transparency—though challenging—is critical for protecting investors' "right to know." In Web3, where misinformation is common (e.g., inconsistent token unlock data across platforms), RootData aims to serve as a reliable source of validated information. The team notes that core team changes around TGE events often signal project risks, yet such details are frequently overlooked. To uphold transparency, RootData publishes monthly reports on false fundraising claims, conducts in-depth analyses (e.g., exchange listing reports), and cross-verifies data rigorously—even declining unverified submissions. They also engage with industry leaders like Binance to align on data accuracy goals. The long-term vision is to transform isolated data points into structured, actionable transparency reports that support informed investmen...

Author: @BlockCookies

Hello everyone, I am the Data Activity Lead at RootData.

The second round of RootData's Bounty Activity has been successfully concluded. While sharing this review, rather than just cold numbers, I'd like to discuss: Why is promoting 'data transparency' in Web3 extremely challenging, yet something that must be done?

First, here are the data for this round's activity: Over 140 unique users participated, providing 1220 pieces of feedback, ultimately resulting in 564 validated data points, with an average approval rate of 46.2%.

Overview of Round 2 Bounty Activity Data

This activity helped RootData supplement nearly 300+ 'People Behind the Alpha,' such as executives and leads from MOMO.FUN, Subhub, boop, etc. These individuals often do not list their positions in their X bios or LinkedIn but may appear at events or be active in communities.

Additionally, we corrected about 120 token unlock information points. Some had inaccurate TGE times, while some had unlock rules not disclosed promptly; these issues were all optimized through the community's efforts.

Furthermore, we conducted in-depth optimization on 150 existing data points. For instance, we found that the founder of Fanable was mistakenly recorded as a non-Web3 individual with the same name, and its Managing Director Sergio had already left; the AINFT project had long changed its Twitter account...

Why are we pushing for transparency in the Web3 space? This data might seem mundane, and RootData itself is an expert in aggregating off-chain data, so why spend our own funds and mobilize the community for such 'grunt work'?

Honestly, when my boss @yubopan1 assigned me this task, I hesitated too. But one thing he said struck a chord: "From the ICO era to the FTX incident, the biggest tragedy for users is the lack of fair 'investment知情权 (right to know).' As crypto moves towards compliance, data platforms must be at the forefront, acting as that mirror."

As the data lead, I deeply feel his judgment is correct: Relying on a single source is insufficient for accuracy. Data未经多方验证 is不足以让 RootData become a platform trusted by investors.

Take token unlock data alone; it's very 'fragmented': the same project might have 5 different versions across 5 mainstream unlock platforms.

As is well known, Binance Listing requires submitting at least 3 team members. RootData has cataloged over 18,000 industry figures. How many update their resumes urgently before TGE, and how many 'quietly leave' after securing funding?

This round revealed: Significant projects experience frequent core team changes around TGE. For investors, this is often a 'barometer' of the project's direction. If no one verifies and discloses this, it gets lost in the daily information overload.

To ensure 'transparency' isn't just a slogan, our current implemented solutions include:

Monthly disclosures of false funding intelligence.
Regular in-depth research, like the recently published 《Exchange Listing Decision Report》.
Increasing the frequency of LinkedIn profile动态抓取 and verification.

Moreover, we insist on rigorous review standards. In this round, a user provided detailed information on the River development team, but the source was merely a post by a third-party account on Binance Square. Despite the detailed content, due to the lack of official endorsement or multi-source cross-verification, we still chose not to approve it.

This round focused on 'Binance Alpha,' and we also attempted communication with the Binance team. We don't aim to target any specific exchange; on the contrary, we hope to stand together with industry giants.

We once reached out to the Binance team to confirm some key dimensions, and the response was very positive: "If there's any information regarding Alpha that needs confirmation, feel free to communicate anytime."

Single-point data correction is just the beginning. In the future, RootData will connect 'discrete data points' into 'logically rigorous transparency reports,'甚至 transforming them into practical investment strategies.

Transparency is a持久战 (long-term battle) and an inevitable path for Web3 to go mainstream. We need more 'data hunters' to join us in揭开迷雾 (lifting the fog). Everyone is welcome to leave comments and discuss.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhy does RootData insist on the laborious task of data cleaning in Web3 space?

ARootData believes that ensuring data transparency is crucial for providing fair 'investment知情权' (right to know) to users, especially after events like the ICO era and FTX incident. They aim to be a reliable platform by verifying data through multiple sources, as unverified data cannot be trusted.

QWhat were the key outcomes of RootData's second bounty event?

AThe event had over 140 independent participants who provided 1,220 feedback entries, resulting in 564 validated data points with an average approval rate of 46.2%. It helped add 300+ 'Alpha behind the people' and corrected about 120 token unlock details.

QWhat challenges exist in maintaining data accuracy for Web3 projects, according to the article?

AData accuracy is highly fragmented; for example, token unlock information for the same project can vary across five mainstream platforms. Additionally, core team members often change frequently around TGE, which is a critical signal for investors but easily overlooked without verification.

QHow does RootData ensure the reliability of the data it collects?

ARootData employs rigorous verification methods, including cross-referencing multiple sources and rejecting data without official backing. They also publish monthly reports on false funding information, conduct deep research like exchange listing reports, and increase frequency of LinkedIn profile checks.

QWhat is RootData's long-term goal regarding data transparency?

ARootData aims to transform discrete data points into logically coherent transparency reports and eventually into practical investment strategies. They seek to collaborate with industry leaders like Binance and encourage more 'data hunters' to join in demystifying Web3 information.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Annual Salary of Millions Competing for Electricians, Meta Rushes to Open Its Own Technical School

The AI boom is facing an unexpected bottleneck: a severe shortage of skilled construction workers and electricians. As tech giants like Meta, OpenAI, and Alphabet race to build massive data centers—such as OpenAI's $16 billion "Stargate" project—they are hitting a critical labor wall. The U.S. needs an estimated 130,000 more electricians, 240,000 construction workers, and 150,000 supervisors by 2030 for AI infrastructure alone, but tens of thousands of electrician jobs go unfilled each year. While AI companies offer high premiums, with electricians earning up to $280,000 annually, worker scarcity still causes massive losses—delays on a single project can cost $14.2 million per month. The complexity of building AI data centers, which require immense power (equivalent to powering hundreds of thousands of homes), sophisticated electrical systems, and advanced liquid cooling solutions, demands highly skilled technicians who are in short supply. To combat this, companies are investing heavily in training. Meta has committed $115 million to a free training school offering tuition, housing, and stipends, targeting 5,000 new workers. OpenAI is partnering with unions to secure skilled labor. These efforts are paying off, with a significant rise in Gen Z interest in trade schools over college. However, the power demands are staggering. AI data centers are driving a rapid surge in electricity consumption, projected to account for up to 12% of U.S. power use by 2028 and raising costs for consumers. Furthermore, the construction boom is project-based, leading to a potential future glut of trained workers once building peaks, which could depress wages industry-wide. The race for AI supremacy now depends as much on skilled hands as on advanced chips.

marsbitHace 28 min(s)

Annual Salary of Millions Competing for Electricians, Meta Rushes to Open Its Own Technical School

marsbitHace 28 min(s)

OpenAI No Longer Sells Its Most Expensive Model for Profit

OpenAI is shifting its business strategy away from promoting its most expensive, flagship models for every task. Recent price cuts—80% for GPT-5.6 Luna and 20% for Terra—signal a deeper change: the company now actively advises users that many tasks don't require the most powerful model. Instead, OpenAI recommends a tiered approach: use the high-end GPT-5.6 Sol for complex planning and analysis, then delegate execution to cheaper models like Luna. This mirrors moves by Anthropic, which recently launched Claude Opus 5 at half the price of its top model, Fable 5. Both companies are de-emphasizing flagship models as primary revenue drivers, using them instead for brand prestige and technological showcases. The industry is entering a "mass-market" phase, similar to automotive, where high-volume, cost-effective models handle daily operations and drive scale. OpenAI's price reductions are partly enabled by AI models themselves optimizing underlying code and infrastructure, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of efficiency gains and cost reduction. Competition is shifting from "who is smartest" to "who offers the best value." The goal is no longer selling individual models but fostering widespread API adoption and ecosystem lock-in. By making AI calls cheap and ubiquitous, companies like OpenAI aim to become the indispensable, utility-like infrastructure powering automated workflows—the "water and electricity" of software, quietly embedded everywhere.

marsbitHace 28 min(s)

OpenAI No Longer Sells Its Most Expensive Model for Profit

marsbitHace 28 min(s)

Suspected 4th Coldcard attack wave sweeps 389 Bitcoin: Galaxy’s Thorn

Coldcard hardware wallet users are facing a new wave of coordinated attacks targeting a firmware flaw, with researcher Alex Thorn flagging 218 recent transactions moving approximately 389 Bitcoin from potentially impacted addresses. The attack pattern shows a high rate of transactions targeting unique victim addresses, differing from previous waves. The vulnerability, which causes affected devices to generate weaker wallet seeds, is estimated to have impacted over 1,100 wallets, leading to around $90 million in Bitcoin stolen. Thorn advises affected users who control their keys may attempt to move funds with a higher-fee transaction before the attacker's transactions are confirmed.

cointelegraphHace 35 min(s)

Suspected 4th Coldcard attack wave sweeps 389 Bitcoin: Galaxy’s Thorn

cointelegraphHace 35 min(s)

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

Bitcoin miners are capitulating as evidenced by a sustained drop in network hash rate and a record-steep 19.9% decline in mining difficulty, signaling the shuttering of unprofitable machines. However, in a significant divergence from historical patterns, the stocks of publicly traded mining companies have soared, with one major player gaining over 430% in the past year, even as BTC's price fell roughly 46%. This surge is largely attributed to these companies pivoting toward the more lucrative AI narrative. Simultaneously, miners face a structural squeeze. Daily block reward revenue in BTC terms has hit a new all-time low following the latest halving, with current dollar-denominated daily revenue around $30 million compared to a longer-term average of ~$40 million. Fee revenue remains negligible, covering less than one block's subsidy over a 28-day average and accounting for only about ten minutes of the network's daily security budget. This capitulation cycle is unique: miner stress and crypto price weakness have decoupled due to alternative revenue streams (AI), while the long-term reliance on increasing bitcoin prices to offset shrinking subsidies continues, with fee income still far from filling the impending gap.

marsbitHace 38 min(s)

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

marsbitHace 38 min(s)

Will the Fed Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Crypto and U.S. Stocks Withstand the Pressure?

The market's expectation for a September Fed rate hike surged dramatically in early August, jumping from under 50% to over 80% within a week. This shift followed a contentious July FOMC meeting, where a 9-3 vote to hold rates revealed growing dissent from hawkish members advocating for an immediate hike to combat persistent inflation. The primary catalyst for this repricing is rising oil prices, driven by renewed geopolitical tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, which threaten global supply. Energy costs directly influence inflation metrics, making the upcoming July CPI report (due August 12th) a critical data point. If it shows inflation reaccelerating, the probability of a September hike will solidify. For Bitcoin and crypto assets, this is typically bearish news. Bitcoin continues to behave as a high-beta, liquidity-sensitive risk asset. A rate hike raises the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets and could drive capital toward money markets, pressuring crypto prices in the short term. However, historical patterns suggest that if a hike is perceived as the end of a tightening cycle rather than the start, any negative price impact may be brief. U.S. stocks, particularly crypto-linked equities like Coinbase and growth-oriented tech stocks, are also vulnerable. Higher rates increase discount rates in valuation models, putting pressure on high-multiple companies. This coincides with a pivotal tech earnings season where investor focus has shifted from massive AI capital expenditure to tangible revenue and cash flow generation. Companies with negative cash flow and weak growth narratives could face heightened volatility if borrowing costs rise in September. In summary, a September Fed hike has evolved into a mainstream market scenario. Key factors to watch are oil prices, the July CPI report, and Fed communications, which will determine the final decision and its impact on volatile crypto and equity markets.

marsbitHace 38 min(s)

Will the Fed Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Crypto and U.S. Stocks Withstand the Pressure?

marsbitHace 38 min(s)

Trading

Spot