Topic: [ANN][ICO] OPHION - A Secure, Anonymous & Decentralized Market |CROWDSALE LIVE| - page 3. (Read 15817 times)

Honestly, I'm going to have to disagree I think... If you advertise a car to go 250 mph at 100 miles per gallon and put nice rims and a paint job on it, yeah you might get some folks interested in your product only for a limited time and consequently to be left disappointed if they end up "riding" said car.  You need to get the engine under the hood souped up and ready to go before you can market and use it to it's full extent.

Coins get around this by adding in "speculative hype" and seem to be "successful" in the short term of things, only to end up fading away by people hearing about another coin people are highly speculating on.  It's funny that people don't understand that when Bitcoin was just getting started, people were wayyy more focused on the code and stuff that was "under the hood" to get everything they wanted out of the coin right before they go about spreading the word amongst their friends and family.

I've bought into DogecoinDark before the name change and yes their developer is one of the best. Active and talented. He has build features like it is nothing. I tip my hat for him.
But the problem is that most DEV are focused on their main thing IT. Which makes it hard for a coin to grow since you don't have marketing going on. Luckily the team of Ophion is bigger, but with some good motivation of the community manager, the community can become very active.

Ok, this may be a stupid question, but: Do you have to rely on a single blockchain? Does it have to be Monero OR Dash? Can't it be both or even more, somehow, maybe even just as a backup? Or people may choose which blockchain to use (with one being the default, obviously)? I'm sorry, I'm utterly uninformed when it comes to stuff like that, maybe it really is just a dumb question.

Btw. since we are talkin about privacy-/anonymity-based crypto-tokens, I'd like to point you towards VERGE (XVG) as well:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/xvg-verge-powmultialgotori2pno-premineico-1365894
Small, but active community and dedicated dev, coin has been around and alive for years now, TOR and I2P implementation, multialgo PoW, makes for a reliable network. Take a look (I am obviously biased here, but still…)

Thanks!
Now that's clear let's discuss the outcome. I read the last replies and there is some good thinking going on here.
Have the community sponsor decide and sponsor is 1 thing. First there must be a community.

I would say let's get some give away or social media promotion going on after the ICO.
Maybe some rewards for the best marketing idea?

Agreed, This is why we plan to offer our current community manager BTCat a more permanent role or look for someone else who can run the community side of things.

Nothing has changed apart from the network we are using. In fact if anything it will work better and more secure.

You are buying into the same market with the same goals and features. There will be no apparent different to the end user.

-Sebastian

Sorry to interrupt but feel that some steps are skipped or forgotten. In the ICO phase it should be clear what you invest (buy into). It seems to me that all in a matter of a 5-10 replies, the complete project has changed? Perhaps the dev. can elaborate this

The above seems like a good solution for the 'problem'. Being that the ICO will give us a head start to so we can survive. I do think that just features are not the key to succes.
To make it an succes you need to assign someone for marketing tasks with some budget.

Most of the coins I've seen die a slow death because of lack of marketing while their developers are doing their utmost best to develop and develop.

Below answer from chennan seems the most viable option, for speed, support and awareness.


chennan, Thanks for your massive help on this matter. You have turned a great project into a greater project. I will be on IRC to speak to these guys soon, Most likely tomorrow as its late here now and I want to make a good impression and do my research. Its been a long time since IRSSI was loaded up that's for sure.

This looks like a good direction and monero looks like a great currency.

-Sebastian

Honestly, that is another reason why I mentioned Monero because I got that vibe from you... the monero community funds the work of devs for all kinds of tasks and projects (which most of the time the devs are seriously underfunded for the work they do)... even though I never post on their pages much, I do love watching the community grow and they have a passion for making everything just right before they release anything out into the wilderness.  You should definitely probably talk to some of them on IRC for some ideas/help on the matter at #monero ... or better yet #moner-dev ... seems like they are always lurking around on there.

@Sebastian

There are 2 options on the table right now. Can you give us an ETA for either option. I am very interested that if the project will be build from scratch how long it will take to build it?
The development of Bitbay started in december 2014 and it's still in BETA

+1

We would have funds and we could hire devs to get work done quickly and work in a fast and productive way, Eventually funds will diminish, but developers like me who love open source projects will stay and more will always be along to help fix stuff like bugs WHEN they happen.

-Sebastian

The strength of any successful product lies in it being unique. Sure small bugs will come and they will be fixed, something that will happen with either option...

But as investors wouldn't you be more attracted to a cutting edge environment made with the sole purpose of it being the next big thing? I would.
Simply because it can't be cloned easily and it can (or should i say, it will) last longer...

I wouldn't want to put people off though when as Chennan has said, there is a lot of investigation into Bitcoin, especially because of its publicity, maybe we could be realistic, work the same method but with a coin like Monero. I could get speaking to the Monero devs about introducing some form of asseting on their chain.

We just want to do what is right for the community and the project, I don't want to create some half-assed project that will die in 5 months time because we didn't put enough resources or thought into the development process.

-Sebastian

Perhaps...
But the concept how it is is good enough for people to invest over 16 BTC in just a week. Which means investors believe in it. So do I tbh. If it is a final choice
- We use APi's and never develop a unique system or
- We use a custom system

My guess would be option 1. With software you will see many things that are developed needs fine-tuning. This hidden markets feature is something genius. Let's see how that will play out.

Well you have to be realistic.
How much time would the project be delayed if we do it the 'good way' Because yes a own secure network is the way to go.

A system with potential should Never depend on another system. Vulnerable systems have no future...

Well... I do think it would be in good interest for the security of the network to be reliant on it's own backbone.  I understand why you would want to be on Bitcoin's large and prominent network for the sake of not having to worry about getting people to run nodes and mine, but again, the aspect of remaining anonymous is another thing. 

So while you can start developing your own code from scratch, you have to understand the implications of what this would/could do to what you already have in place... if you are considering having a PoW network, then obviously this crowdsale seems a little bit silly if you want to attract people to point there miners over this way.  BUT, you might want to consider trying to see if you can implement a way to run the code through one of the more popular cryptonote coins... Monero, Dash, etc. ...

Now, in terms of cryptonote coins, I have more trust in Monero personally because Dash relies on masternodes, which could significantly reduce the security & reliability of the network for multiple reasons and also Monero has a pretty active dev team working on leading edge stuff such as RingCT. But that's just how I view things... I think the community should definitely take part on what they/we want in their network.

Regardless it's a tough decision, but I would highly suggest doing something different in terms of relying on Bitcoin's blockchain.

Chennan,

I'm fascinated by what you have to say and in the process have asked myself a lot of questions and you are right... very right in fact.

We have yet to start full development, so ideas can evolve and we can change some aspects to the whitepaper whilst keeping an asset/coin system and adhering to what has been bought in ICO so far so the same value applies to the new system.

I want ideas from people here as full development is going to start very soon.

Bitcoin was made to be open and provable, but does that have to be the case with this?
We have a number of obstacles to overcome.

a. If we Don't use the Bitcoin network or another network, we would need our own. This would require a system to prove transactions and keep the network running. Maybe some PoW CPU based.
b. Would we need to show transaction db (blockchain), as long as our network could read it, it could be encrypted and only show address -> address transactions.

We could make this a lot more secure if we were to use our own codebase, it would just take longer development... It would satisfy me as I have built the network I have always dreamed off. We could keep the same features and even add more. We wouldn't need to rely on third party API's like counterparty or third party networks.

Please everyone let me know what you think, we could do this from scratch, As for development time I couldn't tell you right now, I would need to hire more developers. But I am happy to.

Please let me know people, do you want to continue with Bitcoin/API approach? or create our own secure network?

-Sebastian

Even though I love the effort put forth by the devs, I still remain optimistically skeptical about the whole thing.  Bitcoin has been proven to not be the least bit anonymous and getting more and more easier to track by governing authorities, as you can see from Coindesk's recent article, "New York police win FinCEN award for Bitcoin investigations" ... I just don't see why you should run on the backbone of something that has been proven to reveal identities of people time and time again.  But I like the initiative to start the trial runs of something like this.

no problem

keep up the good work!