ICO white papers are unnecessarily long. Bitcoin white paper was only 9 pages. Telegram/TON’s white paper is 132 page. I’d say our natural tendency is to inflate and thereby sound important, but it shows intellectual laziness, dishonesty, and doubt in their ideas.
When you read redundant ICO white papers with full of jargons, it’s safe to say that they are BS. Sure, in some cases, the papers are unintelligible because they’re actually hard ideas to grasp, but in other cases, they’re deliberately written in an obscure way to seem as if they are talking about something important.
This is not new phenomena. This is true in any types of a publication like books, online articles, and academic papers. In 1996, Alan Sokal submitted his article to an academic journal of postmodern cultural studies. It was an experiment to test if a leading North American journal would publish an article salted with nonsense. And guess what? The article was published in the Social Text spring/summer 1996. You cannot trust it even if there were a filter in between writers and readers.
redundancy + full of jargons = BS