Pages:
Author

Topic: [PRE-ANN] OPAIR | Decentralized Debit Cards | OCaml | New Blockchain Platform - page 49. (Read 127671 times)

sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
Why it is not possible to pay the bounties with the BTC from the first stage?
Why you don't use up the first stage first?
I really don't know, what you mean with "marketing expenses"? The 59 $ for the wordpress theme?
Legal consultations, really is there someone or does the fictional CEO contacted a fictional lawyer?
What you mean by "we organize ourselves in some sort of structure"?
I think with the total amount of money it is useless to hire someone, because just not enough. So, if you can't find the resources to program it by your own, refund the people.

Why you all the time just ask for money and don't proof the "Fudders" wrong by delivering as you promised?



Truely, some sort of structure means there is no structural planning or don't know how to organize things/work or anything. But, I don't about the other things about this project.

From the first message on the thread:

Quote
Important


Frank, our founder, proposed to create a gGmbH -it is similar to a tax-exempt LLC but in Germany- to manage the funds gathered at the ICO, which we think it will be a wise move and it will offer more transparency to our project and the security for to the XPO holders to know that we will not act irrationally or for our own profit. Therefore after discussing this matter and given that Frank lives in Germany we decided that the idea of creating a gGmbH or another type of organization will bring reassurance and confidence to our investors.   

Regards
sr. member
Activity: 504
Merit: 250
askNFTY Team Account
Why it is not possible to pay the bounties with the BTC from the first stage?
Why you don't use up the first stage first?
I really don't know, what you mean with "marketing expenses"? The 59 $ for the wordpress theme?
Legal consultations, really is there someone or does the fictional CEO contacted a fictional lawyer?
What you mean by "we organize ourselves in some sort of structure"?
I think with the total amount of money it is useless to hire someone, because just not enough. So, if you can't find the resources to program it by your own, refund the people.

Why you all the time just ask for money and don't proof the "Fudders" wrong by delivering as you promised?



Truely, some sort of structure means there is no structural planning or don't know how to organize things/work or anything. But, I don't about the other things about this project.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
Xbladex,

We know that the two features that highlight in our project are the use of functional programming and decentralized debits cards, which both go to be our two main pillars. We are going to focus and develop these characteristics in the first place. And from there we continue to advance.

Our plan continues as before:

1) Qt wallet for the distribution.
2) In a month try the first beta with some functions. The first function in which work is in the use of the decentralized debit cards as we said before.
3) When we have a stable product, we will launch our platform.

With the funds, we need to pay the bounties, marketing expenses (pre-ico), legal consultations (we organize ourselves in some sort of structure. We look for the one that best suits the needs of the project.) and to hire programmers & pay salaries.

Regards
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1002
...
It's good to read you. For our part we agree with this and have intentions to reach an agreement. We expect more information from you about the content of the agreement.

Regards

I guess all agreed that realising ICO founds according to milestones i see only those one:
This is not 700 BTC you wish but what we can do of it ?

Term 2 – Development

-   Extensive White paper and wiki about our new programming language on Github.
-   New wallet, focus on easy to use for everyone and mass market adoption.
-   Alias System.
-   Decentralized debit cards.
-   Light client
-   Implement trusted system and market core .
-   Support for assets-contracts via colored coins.
-   Smart Contracts. New programming language based on OCaml.
-   Private Chains.
-   Decentralized voting, messaging & mailing system.
-   Crowdfunding platform.
-   At this point, we want to focus on the speed and scalability of our platform.

Can you tell us what can you develop having 150 BTC and payed after reach milestones?
And 1st phase ICO what you can deliver with 65 BTC ?

PS: Opair without "debit cards" would be new junk coin that's my 2  cents.
hero member
Activity: 506
Merit: 510
Hello just wanted to confirm why is there 2 phase of ico? I Thought its only 1 ico since the start?

Thanks
the first phase just sent to dev (early time  have not escrow)
the second phase after someday have escrow
all at the Ico time
hero member
Activity: 1568
Merit: 511
Hello just wanted to confirm why is there 2 phase of ico? I Thought its only 1 ico since the start?

Thanks
YIz
hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 502
Hello everyone, I received alot of pm's regarding the current case. Suggestions and around 10 or so refund requests. No forwarding request yet.

Well, the situation is at a stop now. Wasserman99 seems to not wanting to deliver something worthy of the coins he already holds. Which is alot of coins.

In any case we need a solution. How about making a timeframe of two weeks from the day we have an agreement settled. This should be sufficient time for investors to check for the status of the coin and make a decision.

The problem is that if wasserman99 would release the coins now to ico 1 investors then I either would have to refund all ico 2 users or forward all coins of users that do want a refund. The latter is no real choice. The reason is that they could hedge against the price of the coin otherwise. Ask for a refund with the coin price drops or ask for the coins when they rise in value.

If wasserman99 sends coins before that timeframe to ico 1 then a refund to ico 2 has to happen to not make it possible to force a forwarding.
If coins are sent to ico 1 and 2 then still ico 2 bitcoins has to be refunded for the same reason.

What happens with the coins of investors that do not make a choice? Well, forwarding might be the way to go if investors do not care about their investment in all this time. Refunding might be another but in any case, no choice can be offered then anymore. Since investors did invest and have a choice to choose to divest then the Libra would be in favor to forward the remaining coins. Because they invested before.

I will not give a suggestion on what investors should do. Everything investors of phase 2 can do is check everything that was said.

Please inform me if there is a weakness in my suggestion.

Hi,

It's good to read you. For our part we agree with this and have intentions to reach an agreement. We expect more information from you about the content of the agreement.

Regards

You might wanna reach an agreement as soon as possible because the investors demand to see some kind of progress, and when will you release the wallet? what about exchanges? those things should have been done until now.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
Hello everyone, I received alot of pm's regarding the current case. Suggestions and around 10 or so refund requests. No forwarding request yet.

Well, the situation is at a stop now. Wasserman99 seems to not wanting to deliver something worthy of the coins he already holds. Which is alot of coins.

In any case we need a solution. How about making a timeframe of two weeks from the day we have an agreement settled. This should be sufficient time for investors to check for the status of the coin and make a decision.

The problem is that if wasserman99 would release the coins now to ico 1 investors then I either would have to refund all ico 2 users or forward all coins of users that do want a refund. The latter is no real choice. The reason is that they could hedge against the price of the coin otherwise. Ask for a refund with the coin price drops or ask for the coins when they rise in value.

If wasserman99 sends coins before that timeframe to ico 1 then a refund to ico 2 has to happen to not make it possible to force a forwarding.
If coins are sent to ico 1 and 2 then still ico 2 bitcoins has to be refunded for the same reason.

What happens with the coins of investors that do not make a choice? Well, forwarding might be the way to go if investors do not care about their investment in all this time. Refunding might be another but in any case, no choice can be offered then anymore. Since investors did invest and have a choice to choose to divest then the Libra would be in favor to forward the remaining coins. Because they invested before.

I will not give a suggestion on what investors should do. Everything investors of phase 2 can do is check everything that was said.

Please inform me if there is a weakness in my suggestion.

Hi,

It's good to read you. For our part we agree with this and have intentions to reach an agreement. We expect more information from you about the content of the agreement.

Regards
hero member
Activity: 506
Merit: 510
 Grin Grin Grin
2016-09-05 12:49:50 github have no code
nothings code things
why no one care
sr. member
Activity: 939
Merit: 256
This is really the weirdest ICO ever. What is wrong with you Opair?  Undecided

+1
Straight from the twilight zone
member
Activity: 74
Merit: 10
Wasserman, are you communicating with SJ?
sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
Too Weird to Live. Too Rare to Die...
This is really the weirdest ICO ever. What is wrong with you Opair?  Undecided
sr. member
Activity: 352
Merit: 253
...it stands for Open and Fair which are the two key elements that we seek to fulfill:

Open Project: The code and our new language will be documented, open source and it will be found at Github.

Fair Distribution: We have been analyzing the last ICO´s and we realized that the distribution is not as fair as it should be...

Open and Fair ahaha megalol  Grin Grin
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
Wasserman needs to speak up and tell us what his milestones are going to be. Then we can talk about assigning value to them and work on a real agreement.

Phase 2 people must decide if they want in or out before anyone gets coins. This will take some time, since they can't decide until Wasserman agrees to deliver.

Once coins are delivered, everyone is locked in (for reasons already explained). But if wasserman failed to deliver the software then remaining locked Opair funds would need to be spread evenly to stage 1 and 2 investors. Since stage 2 investors would have gotten their Opair coin and already had the option to dump them, it would be too late for a full refund.

@Wasserman - Exactly what features are you going to eventually deliver with the entire ICO fund? We need to know to make an agreement.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 1083
Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile
Hello everyone, I received alot of pm's regarding the current case. Suggestions and around 10 or so refund requests. No forwarding request yet.

Well, the situation is at a stop now. Wasserman99 seems to not wanting to deliver something worthy of the coins he already holds. Which is alot of coins.

In any case we need a solution. How about making a timeframe of two weeks from the day we have an agreement settled. This should be sufficient time for investors to check for the status of the coin and make a decision.

The problem is that if wasserman99 would release the coins now to ico 1 investors then I either would have to refund all ico 2 users or forward all coins of users that do want a refund. The latter is no real choice. The reason is that they could hedge against the price of the coin otherwise. Ask for a refund with the coin price drops or ask for the coins when they rise in value.

If wasserman99 sends coins before that timeframe to ico 1 then a refund to ico 2 has to happen to not make it possible to force a forwarding.
If coins are sent to ico 1 and 2 then still ico 2 bitcoins has to be refunded for the same reason.

What happens with the coins of investors that do not make a choice? Well, forwarding might be the way to go if investors do not care about their investment in all this time. Refunding might be another but in any case, no choice can be offered then anymore. Since investors did invest and have a choice to choose to divest then the Libra would be in favor to forward the remaining coins. Because they invested before.

I will not give a suggestion on what investors should do. Everything investors of phase 2 can do is check everything that was said.

Please inform me if there is a weakness in my suggestion.
legendary
Activity: 1007
Merit: 1000
My question, when using a JS to OCAML converter, is it possible new errors and attack vectors may be introduced?
Some analysis of the Javascript produced by the compiler would be needed to ensure everything is fine. But once this work is done, we would be very confident that no smart contract written in OCaml can escape the scope of the produced Javascript, which is quite small. Not the whole Javascript language is used, just a subset. And since the compilation is automated, and predictable, the final effect would be to restrict the spectrum of possible attacks compared to human-written Javascript, not widen it.

A “pure” OCaml solution would be even better, but it would require lots of resources to ensure this is done correctly. So, I'd rather choose to trust the smart people who already put huge efforts in developing existing tools. And if, in the end, the project is a success and you gather the necessary resources, you can still rewrite everything in OCaml, with virtually no work to port the existing smart contracts to the new blockchain.

Brilliant! In no way was I trying to say errors would happen, I was simply unsure as I only have a very basic knowledge of JS and absolutely none of OCAML. Thank you for your well-written description, and I definately +1 to your idea Smiley
newbie
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
My question, when using a JS to OCAML converter, is it possible new errors and attack vectors may be introduced?
Some analysis of the Javascript produced by the compiler would be needed to ensure everything is fine. But once this work is done, we would be very confident that no smart contract written in OCaml can escape the scope of the produced Javascript, which is quite small. Not the whole Javascript language is used, just a subset. And since the compilation is automated, and predictable, the final effect would be to restrict the spectrum of possible attacks compared to human-written Javascript, not widen it.

A “pure” OCaml solution would be even better, but it would require lots of resources to ensure this is done correctly. So, I'd rather choose to trust the smart people who already put huge efforts in developing existing tools. And if, in the end, the project is a success and you gather the necessary resources, you can still rewrite everything in OCaml, with virtually no work to port the existing smart contracts to the new blockchain.
legendary
Activity: 1007
Merit: 1000
Just a thought, but are there any OCAML devs in the community?

I'm an OCaml dev, and wiling to help if I can and if this project turns to be legit. The idea in itself is quite good. Functional programming languages such as OCaml are indeed less prone to bugs, and more friendly to static analysis. Ultimately, it could mean: more robust smart contracts, less attack vectors, less drama...

I'd be happy to read a technical whitepaper, or at least detailed explanations, on how the dev team plans to achieve the goal. IMHO, as I understood the partial information given in the OP, such development requires an enormous amount of work. Developing a whole compiler backend for a new blockchain tech is not trivial, and serious skills are necessary.

My take on the matter is that it would be interesting to consider leveraging existing blockchains and OCaml tools. For example, one could start from Lisk, and use OCaml-to-Javascript compilers (such as js_of_ocaml) to achieve a similar goal to what is suggested in the OP. Some work would still be required, obviously, but it would be much more realistic with few resources available (small team, modest funding).
This is exactly the kind of thing i was hoping to read when I asked if community has any OCAML devs Smiley
My question, when using a JS to OCAML converter, is it possible new errors and attack vectors may be introduced?
newbie
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
Just a thought, but are there any OCAML devs in the community?

I'm an OCaml dev, and wiling to help if I can and if this project turns to be legit. The idea in itself is quite good. Functional programming languages such as OCaml are indeed less prone to bugs, and more friendly to static analysis. Ultimately, it could mean: more robust smart contracts, less attack vectors, less drama...

I'd be happy to read a technical whitepaper, or at least detailed explanations, on how the dev team plans to achieve the goal. IMHO, as I understood the partial information given in the OP, such development requires an enormous amount of work. Developing a whole compiler backend for a new blockchain tech is not trivial, and serious skills are necessary.

My take on the matter is that it would be interesting to consider leveraging existing blockchains and OCaml tools. For example, one could start from Lisk, and use OCaml-to-Javascript compilers (such as js_of_ocaml) to achieve a similar goal to what is suggested in the OP. Some work would still be required, obviously, but it would be much more realistic with few resources available (small team, modest funding).
full member
Activity: 179
Merit: 100
PLEASE when you reach any solution please put it on the first page of this thread or it the Opair site to not have to read 2-3 pages all days with the same shit...
Pages:
Jump to: