[PRE-ANN] OPAIR | Decentralized Debit Cards | OCaml | New Blockchain Platform

[wasserman99]

One questions: Can you give us more details on how and where will the registration for betas?

I think that up to 10% via PoW be logical. No more, please.

Sure but all information is available in this thread. They will be announced on our website, in Medium and here. About when, still we can not give you an exact date. We estimate that the first beta will be available two weeks after we finish distributing of the ICO.

• Beta Rules

-   They will be open to all users. There will be no restrictions and anyone who fills the form (bear in mind there is a maximum capacity) will be able to participate. They will be open in order to show more transparency but, we hope that all participants follow our guidelines so as to insurance the Beta’s success. While each Beta version will have the goal of finding bugs in the code and trying out the new features, it may also have a specific objective. For example, to make a hack or stress test.  

-   Each Beta version will have a documented version of their Github’s results so that those users who could not participate, can access them.  

-   As we said throughout the thread, the idea is to launch a basic platform shortly after the ICO ends to start the distribution and, at the same time, try out the first Beta versions of our new platform. Once we have our first stable version we will transfer everyone to it on a pre-set date so as everybody is on the loop and no one is taken by surprise. The mining will continue on the new platform taking into consideration the stage found under the rules set it in here. We estimate that we will have the first public Beta two weeks after we finish distributing the ICO and the first steady version two months after the ICO. It may seem like a lot of time at first, but in order to achieve a solid and steady development it is truly a short one. Fortunately, we have been working on this project for months now and our expectations are high.  

-   They will be announced on our website, in Medium and on this thread along with all the information required on how to participate.

[1714943724]

1714943724

[1714943724]

1714943724

[1714943724]

1714943724

[1714943724]

1714943724

[super-cpu]

 nice project 

[wasserman99]

One questions: Can you give us more details on how and where will the registration for betas?

I think that up to 10% via PoW be logical. No more, please.

If 70% goes to ICO and 30% to PoW where do the bounties come from?

As we said, in the distribution 0% will go for us as background/premine/developer funds/bounty funds, we believe it would be unfair. All payments will be supported by us from what we gather at ICO.

[YIz]

When should I send the translation for the thread? after the ICO starts or after it?

[animalroam]

Very interesting coin and will keep track of it.

[wasserman99]

When should I send the translation for the thread? after the ICO starts or after it?

YIz, when ready send me a private message.

[ttookk]

One questions: Can you give us more details on how and where will the registration for betas?

I think that up to 10% via PoW be logical. No more, please.

If 70% goes to ICO and 30% to PoW where do the bounties come from?

As we said, in the distribution 0% will go for us as background/premine/developer funds/bounty funds, we believe it would be unfair. All payments will be supported by us from what we gather at ICO.

Hmmm, I'm not too sure why so many people have a problem with devs holding a share of their coin. I agree that it's hard to determine the right amount, but in the end, it gives the devs an incentive to keep working on their coin.

Here is an idea I had regarding dev shares:
There is one ICO in the beginning. The devs keep a relatively big share of the coins, but they are locked by a contract and are sold in not one big, but in multiple following COs*. When this COs will happen is determined before the first ICO, ideally, the coins are either generated at fixed block heights or are locked by smart contracts and released at fixed block heights.

My reasoning behind this is as follows:
1.: It will keep the devs invested, since successful development would increase the amounts collected in the following COs.
2.: Since the releases are fixed, the market can adjust.
(I had additional points, but I'm too tired to articulate them…)

Obviously, the amounts and points in time when those releases are happening need to be determined carefully.

Thoughts?

*Since ICO means "Initial Coin Offering", the others are just "Coin Offernings"

[kooke]

One questions: Can you give us more details on how and where will the registration for betas?

I think that up to 10% via PoW be logical. No more, please.

If 70% goes to ICO and 30% to PoW where do the bounties come from?

As we said, in the distribution 0% will go for us as background/premine/developer funds/bounty funds, we believe it would be unfair. All payments will be supported by us from what we gather at ICO.

Hmmm, I'm not too sure why so many people have a problem with devs holding a share of their coin. I agree that it's hard to determine the right amount, but in the end, it gives the devs an incentive to keep working on their coin.

Here is an idea I had regarding dev shares:
There is one ICO in the beginning. The devs keep a relatively big share of the coins, but they are locked by a contract and are sold in not one big, but in multiple following COs*. When this COs will happen is determined before the first ICO, ideally, the coins are either generated at fixed block heights or are locked by smart contracts and released at fixed block heights.

My reasoning behind this is as follows:
1.: It will keep the devs invested, since successful development would increase the amounts collected in the following COs.
2.: Since the releases are fixed, the market can adjust.
(I had additional points, but I'm too tired to articulate them…)

Obviously, the amounts and points in time when those releases are happening need to be determined carefully.

Thoughts?

*Since ICO means "Initial Coin Offering", the others are just "Coin Offernings"

I think I'm with the dev at this point. It is a good decision to decide to distribute 100% of the coin, not holding anything for them. As said, they will buy stakes but when the ICO has ended. On the other hand, you and I know that is probably a big big ICO, which do not need to earn extra money as premine.

[darkagentx]

I am assuming this coin has undergone mining, when you be able to provide a working block explorer?

[wasserman99]

One questions: Can you give us more details on how and where will the registration for betas?

I think that up to 10% via PoW be logical. No more, please.

If 70% goes to ICO and 30% to PoW where do the bounties come from?

As we said, in the distribution 0% will go for us as background/premine/developer funds/bounty funds, we believe it would be unfair. All payments will be supported by us from what we gather at ICO.

Hmmm, I'm not too sure why so many people have a problem with devs holding a share of their coin. I agree that it's hard to determine the right amount, but in the end, it gives the devs an incentive to keep working on their coin.

Here is an idea I had regarding dev shares:
There is one ICO in the beginning. The devs keep a relatively big share of the coins, but they are locked by a contract and are sold in not one big, but in multiple following COs*. When this COs will happen is determined before the first ICO, ideally, the coins are either generated at fixed block heights or are locked by smart contracts and released at fixed block heights.

My reasoning behind this is as follows:
1.: It will keep the devs invested, since successful development would increase the amounts collected in the following COs.
2.: Since the releases are fixed, the market can adjust.
(I had additional points, but I'm too tired to articulate them…)

Obviously, the amounts and points in time when those releases are happening need to be determined carefully.

Thoughts?

*Since ICO means "Initial Coin Offering", the others are just "Coin Offernings"

Ttook, we do not need the premine incentive. Obviously we will have a % of the project, but do not get by premine/bounty dev or buying at the stage of ICO (because it would be fraud). When the ICO ends, we will invest a percentage of what we got in the ICO and our own money to buy our stakes.

I am assuming this coin has undergone mining, when you be able to provide a working block explorer?

Opair will obviously be premine for distribution but will be later, when the distribution process begins.

[sulec70]

How many slot avaiable of Signature Campaign?
Where we check spreadsheet list?

[Lutpin]

How many slot avaiable of Signature Campaign? Where we check spreadsheet list?

We're running a reward pool based signature campaign, which means there's no upper limit to the participants.
For more information, check out the main post in the signature campaign thread.

[kooke]

One questions: Can you give us more details on how and where will the registration for betas?

I think that up to 10% via PoW be logical. No more, please.

If 70% goes to ICO and 30% to PoW where do the bounties come from?

As we said, in the distribution 0% will go for us as background/premine/developer funds/bounty funds, we believe it would be unfair. All payments will be supported by us from what we gather at ICO.

Hmmm, I'm not too sure why so many people have a problem with devs holding a share of their coin. I agree that it's hard to determine the right amount, but in the end, it gives the devs an incentive to keep working on their coin.

Here is an idea I had regarding dev shares:
There is one ICO in the beginning. The devs keep a relatively big share of the coins, but they are locked by a contract and are sold in not one big, but in multiple following COs*. When this COs will happen is determined before the first ICO, ideally, the coins are either generated at fixed block heights or are locked by smart contracts and released at fixed block heights.

My reasoning behind this is as follows:
1.: It will keep the devs invested, since successful development would increase the amounts collected in the following COs.
2.: Since the releases are fixed, the market can adjust.
(I had additional points, but I'm too tired to articulate them…)

Obviously, the amounts and points in time when those releases are happening need to be determined carefully.

Thoughts?

*Since ICO means "Initial Coin Offering", the others are just "Coin Offernings"

I think I'm with the dev at this point. It is a good decision to decide to distribute 100% of the coin, not holding anything for them. As said, they will buy stakes but when the ICO has ended. On the other hand, you and I know that is probably a big big ICO, which do not need to earn extra money as premine.

I would add that if the bounties are free (premine), only serve to be dumped into the market as soon as the coin hits the exchanges. Thus, if the devs have to buy coins for bounties in the market, at least it serves to counteract the dump of the bounties (we all know that what is obtained in signature campaigns, users are going to sell as soon as they can)

[wavespump]

How much are you people looking to raise ?

Good question, PR could u tell us how many btcs is your target? If the target is not met, will the project launch?

Steveds & Altcoinrich, to be honest we do not have a specified amount but we believe that, at least, 700 BTC would need to put together. From then on, all collected serve to optimize, accelerate, hire more people, marketing, legal costs, go to more events and create a division that works as an incubator  (as we said in our thread: "When we have enough founds, we would like to use some of them to create a division that will work as an incubator to relevant projects (can be IoT related works, DAO, Dapps, frameworks and so on) in the ecosystem we aim to create in Opair.")

It looks like an interesting project you have here. What experience do you have in coding smart contracts?

Both Frank and Hao, have not worked in previous projects that include the application of smart contracts but both have the necessary knowledge (they have knowledge of functional programming and OCaml as well) and years of experience in leading companies. Even Hao, is currently working as a blockchain developer at IBM.

what is the algo used? you have not specified it in the op

Amph, the PoW phase was stipulated to occupy 30% of the distribution during the period of 1 year but many people have complained that 30% via PoW may be manipulated by whales so I will talk with Frank and Hao to reach a consensus on the new distribution. I imagine that we will modify the percentages, maybe 90-10 or 85-15 (instead of 70-30), and perhaps its duration. Our idea is to settle the matter on the weekend, so before the ICO the rules will be clear and defined for all. About the algo, we think on X13 (or a modification of it) as is known and stable for everyone, because we do not want to revolutionize this aspect, but serves us as a safe & fast distribution method. During the weekend, we will update this with the final information about the PoW distribution.

Good info, HAO is a Chinese, i trust him, because i am a Chinese too.

The lower POW rate is better, I prefer 0.  10% is also acceptable to me.

[wavespump]

One questions: Can you give us more details on how and where will the registration for betas?

I think that up to 10% via PoW be logical. No more, please.

If 70% goes to ICO and 30% to PoW where do the bounties come from?

As we said, in the distribution 0% will go for us as background/premine/developer funds/bounty funds, we believe it would be unfair. All payments will be supported by us from what we gather at ICO.

Hmmm, I'm not too sure why so many people have a problem with devs holding a share of their coin. I agree that it's hard to determine the right amount, but in the end, it gives the devs an incentive to keep working on their coin.

Here is an idea I had regarding dev shares:
There is one ICO in the beginning. The devs keep a relatively big share of the coins, but they are locked by a contract and are sold in not one big, but in multiple following COs*. When this COs will happen is determined before the first ICO, ideally, the coins are either generated at fixed block heights or are locked by smart contracts and released at fixed block heights.

My reasoning behind this is as follows:
1.: It will keep the devs invested, since successful development would increase the amounts collected in the following COs.
2.: Since the releases are fixed, the market can adjust.
(I had additional points, but I'm too tired to articulate them…)

Obviously, the amounts and points in time when those releases are happening need to be determined carefully.

Thoughts?

*Since ICO means "Initial Coin Offering", the others are just "Coin Offernings"

I think I'm with the dev at this point. It is a good decision to decide to distribute 100% of the coin, not holding anything for them. As said, they will buy stakes but when the ICO has ended. On the other hand, you and I know that is probably a big big ICO, which do not need to earn extra money as premine.

I would add that if the bounties are free (premine), only serve to be dumped into the market as soon as the coin hits the exchanges. Thus, if the devs have to buy coins for bounties in the market, at least it serves to counteract the dump of the bounties (we all know that what is obtained in signature campaigns, users are going to sell as soon as they can)

I find a question, if 100% distributed, where does the bounty coin from? Devs buy coins or they get the coins by mining??   

They don't reserve one coin which is good, look DAO, but DAO had bad future, this coin will have good future.

[hananl1styo]

translate to indonesian language done

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1559713.0

thanks

[ttookk]

One questions: Can you give us more details on how and where will the registration for betas?

I think that up to 10% via PoW be logical. No more, please.

If 70% goes to ICO and 30% to PoW where do the bounties come from?

As we said, in the distribution 0% will go for us as background/premine/developer funds/bounty funds, we believe it would be unfair. All payments will be supported by us from what we gather at ICO.

Hmmm, I'm not too sure why so many people have a problem with devs holding a share of their coin. I agree that it's hard to determine the right amount, but in the end, it gives the devs an incentive to keep working on their coin.

Here is an idea I had regarding dev shares:
There is one ICO in the beginning. The devs keep a relatively big share of the coins, but they are locked by a contract and are sold in not one big, but in multiple following COs*. When this COs will happen is determined before the first ICO, ideally, the coins are either generated at fixed block heights or are locked by smart contracts and released at fixed block heights.

My reasoning behind this is as follows:
1.: It will keep the devs invested, since successful development would increase the amounts collected in the following COs.
2.: Since the releases are fixed, the market can adjust.
(I had additional points, but I'm too tired to articulate them…)

Obviously, the amounts and points in time when those releases are happening need to be determined carefully.

Thoughts?

*Since ICO means "Initial Coin Offering", the others are just "Coin Offernings"

Ttook, we do not need the premine incentive. Obviously we will have a % of the project, but do not get by premine/bounty dev or buying at the stage of ICO (because it would be fraud). When the ICO ends, we will invest a percentage of what we got in the ICO and our own money to buy our stakes.

I am assuming this coin has undergone mining, when you be able to provide a working block explorer?

Opair will obviously be premine for distribution but will be later, when the distribution process begins.

What I wrote was just an idea. It's very possible that it's flawed.

I should clarify, that I don't suspect you guys of scamming. But others might. My suggestions were mostly about sending those people a message. Additionally, if all goes well, it would be a way to get more money, just over a longer timespan.

[bitwarrior]

Will this Opaircoin on full feature released once the ICO has been completed? If not how soon will all its features will be fully implemented? Do you have any working roadmap as well?
Has it done some all kind of testing too? Thanks

[sunce33]

Translate to Croatian/Hrvatski

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1561426.new#new

Thanks

[PGPpfKkx]

Very interesting project, some questions before I invest:

1) is there a minimum amount of funds you need to go on and will you provide refunds if you don't catch the target
2) have you considered how much time will it take to make a smart contract platform in a functional language? Ethereum's language is much simpler than a functional one and only the task of making a new language with 2-3 people is daunting.
3) what is the main language that this coin will be developed? c++? the gui seems same as all other wallets, it's just a prototype right?

best of luck

btw my 2 cents:
this project is much more interesting than waves BS that was a project without any real innovation, im just worried that too much is promised.

language naming proposal: laniakea (the new galaxy supercluster discovered)