Opinion by: Sasha Shilina, founding father of Episteme and researcher at Paradigm Analysis Institute
In 2024, Nature reported a record-breaking variety of scientific paper retractions: over 10,000 papers pulled from journals resulting from fraud, duplication or flawed methodology. Peer assessment, the long-revered spine of educational legitimacy, is beneath siege. It’s too sluggish, too opaque and too simply gamed.
In the meantime, synthetic intelligence fashions skilled on this flawed information set generate assured however nonsensical output. Papers cite nonexistent research. Analysis choices are guided by affect, not inference. The web, as soon as hailed as a democratizing pressure for information, is now a battleground of misinformation, clickbait and manipulated metrics.
We live in an epistemic disaster.
And but, buried within the unlikely corners of Crypto X and decentralized autonomous group (DAO) boards, a brand new structure is forming. Not for transferring worth, however for verifying reality.
A layer 2 for information
Within the crypto world, layer 2s handle the scalability subject. They assist Ethereum course of extra transactions sooner and cheaper. However what if the true scalability bottleneck isn’t monetary — it’s epistemological?
Science isn’t scaling. Status hierarchies, legacy journals and funding gatekeepers bottleneck it. Good hypotheses die in grant purgatory. Replications go unrewarded. Errors take years to right, if ever.
What does a “layer 2 for reality” really appear like? This technique transforms scientific hypotheses into onchain objects, public, persistent and open to scrutiny. As an alternative of broadcasting perception on social media, members stake it, placing pores and skin within the recreation and exposing their convictions to actual danger. Decision turns into a hybrid course of: AI fashions parse and rating proof, human validators contest or affirm outcomes, and decentralized oracles file the end result transparently. Crucially, incentives shift away from status and towards precision, rewarding those that are proper, not simply well-positioned.
This isn’t decentralized finance (DeFi). It’s not even decentralized science (DeSci). It’s agentic, decentralized science (DeScAI). Extra radically, nevertheless, it’s epistemic finance: Markets constructed not round cash however claims.
Betting on actuality
This isn’t simply science playing. It’s a structural inversion. At the moment, the educational economic system rewards being fascinating, not right. Flashy papers get media consideration and grant renewals, whether or not or not their findings replicate. In the meantime, replication research, null outcomes and quiet work typically vanish.
Prediction markets can flip the script. They pay you to be proper. To not be loud, well-known or institutionally blessed, however merely right concerning the world. If a biotech researcher predicts {that a} specific compound will scale back tumor development by 20% in mice, and so they’re proper, they win. In the event that they’re improper, they lose. Easy. Clear. Brutally trustworthy.
On this mannequin, perception turns into a measurable asset. Information turns into liquid. {The marketplace} doesn’t simply commerce tokens; it trades epistemic confidence.
The oracle downside reimagined
In crypto, the “oracle downside” is getting real-world information onto the blockchain trustlessly. On this epistemic structure, the oracle isn’t only a value feed. It mediates what’s accepted as reality.
Associated: Crypto coverage traits to observe in 2025: Privateness, growth and adoption
This raises uncomfortable questions: Who will get to resolve what’s true? Can AI function a dependable resolver? What occurs when markets are improper?
The reply is that there’s no singular oracle. There’s a protocol. Decision turns into a course of: part-automated, part-contested and part-historical. Contributors problem, replace and refine claims. Reality turns into iterative, open-source and adversarial, like code.
Sure, this opens the door to epistemic volatility. In a world the place even Nobel laureates get it improper, isn’t volatility higher than stagnation?
From publishing to protocols
The web disrupted publishing. Blockchains disrupted finance. Now, a 3rd disruption is underway: the protocolization of data.
On this rising paradigm, the structure of data itself is being reimagined. Papers are not static PDFs however dynamic contracts embedded with predictive weight, designed to tell and be examined. Citations develop into greater than scholarly gestures; they’re remodeled into onchain hyperlinks annotated with confidence scores and traceable affect. As soon as a closed gatekeeping ritual, peer assessment evolves into an open, adversarial verification market the place claims could be challenged, revised and resolved in public view.
On this mannequin, science stops being a static archive and turns into an financial, dynamic and plural dwelling system.
Reality is the subsequent asset class
We’ve priced cash, time and a focus. We’ve by no means actually priced perception. Not till now.
A brand new form of market emerges, one which doesn’t reward hypothesis however verification — a civic instrument for aligning incentives round reality in an age of noise. The query isn’t whether or not these markets are dangerous. All markets are. The query is: Can we afford to not strive?
If crypto is a brand new web, we want greater than memes, memecoins and monkey JPEGs. We want infrastructure for the subsequent epistemic period: for validating what issues, when it issues, in public.
The subsequent massive layer isn’t for cash. It’s for the reality.
Opinion by: Sasha Shilina, founding father of Episteme and researcher at Paradigm Analysis Institute.
This text is for common data functions and isn’t supposed to be and shouldn’t be taken as authorized or funding recommendation. The views, ideas, and opinions expressed listed below are the creator’s alone and don’t essentially replicate or signify the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
