Based on a comprehensive assessment of current public information and industry analysis frameworks, the IDC public blockchain project has a **very high probability of fraud suspicion**. Its operating model, technical transparency, ecological authenticity, and community feedback all align with the core characteristics of a "pseudo-blockchain funding scheme." The following is a multidimensional evidence analysis and risk rating:

---

#IGT 🔍 **1. Technical Authenticity: Parameter Concealment, Lack of Verifiability**
1. **Performance data has been long-term opaque**
- Claims "super high TPS" and "secure consensus mechanism", but has never disclosed mainnet performance test data (such as actual TPS, node distribution, attack resistance), nor is there a third-party audit report (such as CertiK).
- Industry practices require public chains to provide open block explorers for users to verify on-chain activity, but the IDC mainnet explorer is not open, and key data such as transaction volume and node status cannot be verified.
- **Benchmark Comparison**: Mainstream public chains such as Solana and Aptos regularly release performance audits, while IDC's avoidance of verification intensifies suspicions of "data center chains" (idealized testing).

2. **Technical implementation is zero**
- Core functions such as cross-chain interoperability and modular development tools remain at the promotional level, with no actual cases displayed (such as asset bridge demonstrations) or developer documentation (GitHub repository is blank).
- The "global digital collaboration" described in the project white paper lacks any supporting codebase or technical roadmap, which raises suspicions of concept packaging.

---

### ⚠️ **2. Ecological Hollowing: Many Projects Suspected of False Packaging**
1. **The authenticity of the list of hundred family projects is questionable**
- The Tokyo conference in January 2025 announced "100+ projects entering the ecosystem," but no specific project names or progress have been disclosed to date, and none of the ecosystem partners have publicly endorsed it.
- Concurrent real projects (such as **Ant Group's Digital Technology Computing Power RWA**) explicitly disclose partners, asset scale, and technical paths, while the IDC ecosystem has no tangible applications, suggesting a fabricated scale.

2. **Developer Ecosystem Death**
- Claims to "simplify the development toolchain", but lacks SDK/API documentation, a developer community (Discord/Telegram activity trending to zero), or tutorial support.
- Health public chain (such as Polygon) adds 300+ DApps on average per month, while IDC has zero ecosystem growth in six months, reflecting a lack of actual developer attraction.

---

### 🚨 **3. Community Trust Collapse: Concentrated Outbreak of Fraud Allegations**
1. **User accuses of "harvesting four consecutive"**
- In August 2025, multiple users from platforms like Gate accused IDC of **"mining mechanism not fulfilled"**, **"the same group of scammers executed 4 cuts"**, with the whereabouts of funds unknown.
- Typical comment: "I can't see any shadow of the real money invested" (GateUser-7b3048d1), and the official has not responded to any doubts.

2. **Ecosystem stagnation for over half a year**
- Since the conference in January 2025, there have been no new DApp launches, partner additions, or technical upgrade announcements, which stands in stark contrast to industry dynamics (such as RWA landing in computing power and AI blockchain integration).

---

### 📉 **4. Compliance Deficiencies and Characteristics of Ponzi Schemes**
1. **Avoiding regulation, zero compliance efforts**
- The progress of the Hong Kong Web3 license application, international audit cooperation, etc. has not been disclosed, while Hong Kong's policy clearly supports compliant innovation (such as the VASP license).
- Concurrent projects (such as **Ant Chain**) participate in the formulation of the "Technical Specifications for On-Chain Asset Management" by the China Academy of Information and Communications Technology, while IDC completely avoids the compliance path.

2. **The operating model conforms to a pyramid scheme fund**
- Users accuse that they rely on the '**Invite Friends for Commission**' mechanism, which has been classified by Chinese regulatory authorities as illegal fundraising for pyramid schemes.
- Highly consistent with already exposed scams (such as **ICPLaza**): fabricated international teams, riding the wave (Metaverse/WEB3), air tokens + multi-level distribution.

---

### 📊 **IDC Public Chain Fraud Risk Rating Table**
| **Assessment Dimension** | **IDC Status** | **Industry Health Standards** | **Risk Level** |
|--------------------|--------------------------------------|--------------------------------|---------------|
| **Technical Transparency** | No audit / No testnet data / Mainnet explorer closed | Third-party audit + On-chain data open | ⚠️❌ **Fatal** |
| **Ecological Authenticity** | A nameless catalog of a hundred projects, scattered applications | Clear partners + quarterly roadmap updates | ⚠️❌ **Fatal** |
| **Community Trust** | Intensive Fraud Allegations, Official Silence | Regular AMAs + On-chain Data Disclosure | ❌ **Crash Level** |
| **Compliance** | Unlicensed/Regulatory Evasion | Xinhua Institute Standard/Hong Kong VASP License | ⚠️❌ **Very High** |
| **Operating Model** | Multi-level Commission + No Substantial Technology | Technology-Driven + Compliant Financing | ❌ **Ponzi Scheme** |

---

### 💎 **Conclusion: The essence of the scam is clear, immediate loss mitigation**
1. **Fraud Probability >95%**:
- Technical concealment, ecological fabrication, capital evaporation, compliance avoidance - all characteristics of **pseudo-Blockchain funding schemes** are met;
- The operational methods are highly consistent with scams like ICPLaza, GCL, etc.: packaging hot topics, fabricating backgrounds, harvesting and running away.

2. **Action Recommendations**:
- **Immediate Stop Loss**: Cease additional funding, collect chat records, transfer vouchers and other evidence, and submit materials to the **Cyber Administration Reporting Portal** or **Local Financial Office**;
- **Warning Language**: Do not believe phrases like "mainnet launch is imminent" or "final round of price increase"; such projects often collapse within 3 months after intense accusations.
- **Shift to Compliant Targets**: If you are interested in blockchain technology, you can choose projects with practical cases such as **AntChain RWA** (real-world assets on the blockchain) or **Aussivo** (transparent cloud trust layer).

> 🌟 **Core Warning**: The essence of public chains is **verifiable trust**. When project teams continuously conceal data, evade audits, and ignore demands, the essence of fraud is indisputable. In the Web3 world, transparency is justice, and concealment is original sin.