ORA:: Development discussion thread

[Kora]

ORA threads
main thread
dev discussion
logo discussion
bounty discussion
CryptoFest



Welcome to the Kora development discussion thread!
Our lead developer, nioccoin, will use this thread to catalogue all relevant ideas & suggestions no matter how insignificant they may seem at the time.

Over time this thread will become the historical record for Kora development.

We welcome and encourage input from everyone interested in Kora, but we have made this a moderated thread to avoid getting bogged down in FUD and irrelevancy. We are very open to constructive criticism, and well thought out criticism of Kora will NOT be deleted, but from experience we have decided to reserve the right to delete any FUD and mindlessly negative posts to help keep this thread readable.

I want to take this opportunity to thank Mac Red & nioccoin for joining with me to start 'Kora', and I want to thank all those who have so far registered to be a stakeholder.

To date Kora has primarily focused on the task of creating a 'fair' and transparent initial distribution to bootstrap a community, and while that work will continue, it is now time to turn our attention to the other crucial task any new crypto currency MUST tackle - the technology!

I urge people to join with nioccoin in a constructive discussion about Kora technical development. nioccoin is our lead dev, but Kora is a decentralised community, and we are all stakeholders with valid opinions, so feel free to join in and have your say!

Will Kora end up being a straight clone of Qora, or will it fork into something new & unique? Let's find out together in this thread


edit: I love this qoute from nioccoin, says it all for me

What separates Kora from most other coins is that we are putting in place a formal and public project plan.  Most coins only open-source their code.  We are going a step further.  To put it differently, we are "crowd-sourcing" our project assumptions, project risks, and candidate solutions, so that the community - you - can help strengthen Kora with your input and ideas.  And like your instinct to protect your quid, or your yuan, or your dollar, Kora's first instinct is to guard stakeholder value.  I have some ideas on how to "build security in" to Kora.  Undoubtedly you do to, and that is what this thread is for.

[1715349071]

1715349071

[1715349071]

1715349071

[1715349071]

1715349071

[1715349071]

1715349071

[nioccoin]

Hello to all.

I have agreed to lead the development of Kora.  I'm going to split this intro into three posts.  This first post will let you know some things about my experience and my development philosophy.  The second post will discuss the already-expressed concerns and questions I have read in the Kora forum.  I realize there are a great many questions about the road ahead, and to be honest, we are in the very early phases of this project, and a successful project is not just about sitting down in a dark corner and pounding out code.  There are a lot of discussions yet to be had, and a great deal of planning as well.
The third post will discuss in more depth the phases of the Kora project.

I have been in tech a long time, working for and with every type of company from corporations to small businesses, government and non-profit.  I have worn many hats, from IT manager to developer to lead developer to project manager to database admin, and much, much more.  I have worked in both Windows and Linux environs.  I have coded all manner of languages, compiled to interpreted.  I have led projects that lasted many months, and ones that lasted days.  I have experienced the thrill of delivering a significant development project, only to have the project cancelled on release day.  I have fixed bugs that were simple syntax or spelling mistakes that took a few minutes to find, and I have debugged distributed systems that required hiring teams of consultants and subject-matter experts, and taken months to complete.

My most recent projects involved writing a number of payment card industry interfaces, and leading a team through PCI-DSS and PA-DSS, which processes are heavily vested in forensic examination of code and the platforms on which they run.  To say the payment card industry is proactive with security is an understatement.  In addition, I have written a number of apps and interfaces in support of telephony initiatives, for third-party control of analog or digital phones.

My development philosophy favours simplicity and elegance over complexity.  I believe in starting small, but with big blueprints, and therefore I believe that the best apps are ones that provide a core function and do it well, but are architected such that they are extensible and scalable.

As for coding, I prefer code reuse whenever possible, up to and including cloning an entire cryptocoin codebase.  I see people all the time singing praises of some app that has an "original" code base.  That might be worth a brief price pump, but what does it really mean?   More often than not it means that someone spent an inordinate amount of time writing an original clone of an already finished product.  There is a time and place for that, but it pays to explore existing solutions.  And more importantly, there should be a very good reason or reasons to start from scratch.

If you go through the codebase of any coin, you will see that most code is not truly original in the aggregate.  Who is going to write a new java library when one already exists that is both optimized and free?  Why not use the boost libs in C++ instead of writing your own?  Or STL?  Even the web uses libs now.  Go to any modern website, and you'll see the prolific reuse of JQuery and hundreds of other JS libs that are free to use and customize.  This is not cheating - it's sensible.  When a civil engineer builds a bridge, he doesn't build a new kind of bridge.  Instead, he reuses best practices and designs that have proven themselves effective.

I am not a language purist or a language snob.  I don't have any opinion about what the best language is.  I have coded a number of them, some I guarantee nobody has ever heard of or ever will hear of.  The fact is, most modern high-level languages will get you where you want to go.  There may be business reasons to use a specific language, such as prevalence of people who know a language, or even client requirements.  It would be somewhat insane to code Kora in LISP unless there existed a huge pool of people who know the language, and who could be easily and cheaply recruited.  So, if I decide the way forward is in CPP and not Java, it does not mean that Java sucks.  It means that given the project requirements, CPP satisfies more business requirements than does Java.  And the reverse may be true.  I'm not saying that I have made any decision about language, this is merely an example.  What I am saying is when the time comes, I will choose the language based on the business needs of the Kora project.

Now that I've regaled you with a bit about myself and my development philosophy, the next stage will be to post something soon that answers questions from the main forum, and also a post that defines the project and its phases.

Stay tuned.

-nio

[Kora]

Hello to all.
....

Wow, I'm really excited now!! Thanks nio

[Mac Red]

Exciting times ahead indeed. Great to see you on board nio.

[ShroomsKit_Disgrace]

Amazing guys!

Monitoring this thread with interest!

[Chris001]

I get what your saying, and we all signed up for Kora, a clone of Qora.

Just saying Qora isn't doing all that great.

NEM started off with the same intention, to clone Nxt. If they did that, they would have been tiny, like NAS.

Just saying no one thought Kora was going to be some top ten crypto. That's for sure. But its going to be great and fun. It has a great community already. This happened with NEM. They did the switch, decided to write the code from scratch. Yes, of course they still used a lot of the same stuff in the code where it made sense, but also made their code, their own, and became not a copy of Nxt, but took their inspiration from Nxt.

NEM will launch in the top ten of all cryptos.

Just saying, if you have the skills to write Kora it's own code. You would make history. Kora would be BETTER than Qora.

You would have a great community behind you. And if you can do it, and have the time, I'm sure the Kora community wouldn't mind you using the amount of stakes saved for the dev fund with NEM as a yardstick for Kora.

Just saying, you might surprise yourself, and come up with something even more unique than originally planned. Think about it. You would be compensated well for doing this for us. (See NEM Development Contract for reference)

Anyway, whatever we do, I am happy to see such a great and talented person as yourself becoming a part of this community, in such an important role!!!


Thank You,



Chris

[DarkhorseofNxt]

I get what your saying, and we all signed up for Kora, a clone of Qora.

Just saying Qora isn't doing all that great.

NEM started off with the same intention, to clone Nxt. If they did that, they would have been tiny, like NAS.

Just saying no one thought Kora was going to be some top ten crypto. That's for sure. But its going to be great and fun. It has a great community already. This happened with NEM. They did the switch, decided to write the code from scratch. Yes, of course they still used a lot of the same stuff in the code where it made since, but also made their code, their own, and became not a copy of Nxt, but took their inspiration from Nxt.

NEM will launch in the top ten of all cryptos.

Just saying, if you have the skills to write Kora it's own code. You would make history. Kora would be BETTER than Qora.

You would have a great community behind you. And if you can do it, and have the time, I'm sure the Kora community wouldn't mind you using the amount of stakes saved for the dev fund with NEM as a yardstick for Kora.

Just saying, you might surprise yourself, and come up with something even more unique than originally planned. Think about it. You would be compensated well for doing this for us. (See NEM Development Contract for reference)

Anyway, whatever we do, I am happy to see such a great and talented person as yourself becoming a part of this community, in such an important role!!!


Thank You,



Chris

I guess you spoke what is in the mind of many. Bravo!

[Pentamon]

+1 what Chris said. New code will set Kora apart.

However, I see a lot of promise in the way that Kora, Mac Red and nioccoin interact.

I get the impression that the so-called 'devs' are communicating well in whichever role they are involved: as project manager, as administrator, or as programmer.

Not only that, they invite participation and input from others - from us. This team is going to go far!

Pentamon

[mladen00]

i agree with Chris

with new code Kora will be much better then Qora

With this IPO we will be the best fair IPO in cryptocurrency history

Devs are great

[feina24h]

i agree with chirs try something new and please choose another name not Kora 

[From Above]

can we implement me in the block chain?

~CfA~

[Equate]

Kora is on right track with great community and developers , keeping watch on this thread.

[Este Nuno]

As for coding, I prefer code reuse whenever possible, up to and including cloning an entire cryptocoin codebase.  I see people all the time singing praises of some app that has an "original" code base.  That might be worth a brief price pump, but what does it really mean?   More often than not it means that someone spent an inordinate amount of time writing an original clone of an already finished product.  There is a time and place for that, but it pays to explore existing solutions.  And more importantly, there should be a very good reason or reasons to start from scratch.

If you go through the codebase of any coin, you will see that most code is not truly original in the aggregate.  Who is going to write a new java library when one already exists that is both optimized and free?  Why not use the boost libs in C++ instead of writing your own?  Or STL?  Even the web uses libs now.  Go to any modern website, and you'll see the prolific reuse of JQuery and hundreds of other JS libs that are free to use and customize.  This is not cheating - it's sensible.  When a civil engineer builds a bridge, he doesn't build a new kind of bridge.  Instead, he reuses best practices and designs that have proven themselves effective.


-nio

Yeah, I think this is a big trend among the average joe altcoiner who doesn't really have a good understanding of how solid code is built up on top of solid code. There's no point in reinventing the wheel.

[nioccoin]

Just an update for the Kora community:  I am working on the planning documents for the Kora Coin project, and also the same for the koracoin.com website.

I.    The first phase of Kora was to gather stakeholders.  Mac Red has done a fine job on this, though his task is not yet over.

II.   The second phase of Kora will be to get a website up and running.  This is a marketing tool, for now, and is more for non-stakeholders to help them evaluate Kora.  One of the things people look for to legitimize a coin is a website, plain and simple.  In a few months, I can all but guarantee that Kora will look nothing like it was first envisioned.  At that point, the community might desire to reinvent the website to more closely match what Kora has become.
Having said that, the website will also be intended as a portal from which you may download the project documents.  So it is also for the Kora community.  This may change, and these ideas will all be discussed in the kora website project plan.

III.  The third phase of Kora will be the coin itself, which is really what we are all here for, right?  The purpose of this phase will be to get a coin and wallets working, primarily so we can distribute stakes.  This is intended to be a baseline project, and will have little in the way of frills.  The reason is the more complicated this phase, the longer it will take, and aside from major structural or architectural changes, there is nothing that cannot be added to this deliverable that cannot be done in phase IV.

IV.   The fourth phase of Kora will be to build new features on top of the base coin.  This phase is the most iterative of all, because it gets repeated ad infinitum, with new things each time.  There will be some overlap with phase III.  Some of the overlap will be significant.  The reason is that from an architectural standpoint, phase III needs to be as loosely-coupled as possible to allow for changes and additions.  However, having some idea of what phase IV will include is necessary for phase III to succeed in creating the hooks for new features.  When I begin asking for feature ideas, it may seem premature, but this is the reason why:  As many of the phase IV ideas as possible need to be gathered during phase III, if even they aren't implemented in phase III.



So, we will kickoff with the koracoin.com web project, which will give us an opportunity to work together and give everyone a taste of how the coin project itself will likely proceed.  Since the website is a much, much smaller project, it allows us to blow through the project phases pretty quickly and get accustomed to how this all works, and make adjustments to the process as needed, without fear of stepping on landmines.  It gives us a chance to work together when the stakes are lowest, and the stress level is lowest.  This is no guarantee of future performance, as they say, but it will allow me to see the community and how we work together.

Meanwhile, I will be addressing many of your questions and concerns about the Kora Coin within the soon to be released project plan.  The "baseline" project is to clone Qora.  This may or may not be in Kora's best interest, but this will be our starting point for a community-wide discussion.  I am aware that many of you have anticipated this baseline, and have already panned the idea of following in Qora's footsteps.  I am not ignoring you, and in fact your concerns are already written into the baseline plan under the "risk register", because what you have pointed out constitute the risks of cloning Qora.  I hope I have covered them all, with your help, but if not it is easily amended.

The advantage of a formal project approach is it will help us to discuss the project in a holistic manner, to make certain we neither miss any opportunities, nor take any license we may later regret.  But most importantly, it will help us to scope the project, so that we stay within the project's boundaries and in so doing we will (hopefully) not have to slip the schedule.  The Kora Coin deliverable doesn't mean the project ends, it merely means it enters a new project phase in which we embellish our creation with new features that set Kora above competing coins.  And the final phase is "rinse and repeat" as many times as is needed.

After the project plan is released, we will enter a feedback loop in which the Kora community provides commentary on the elements of the project plan.  In theory, we then would begin modifying the plan until we come to an agreement on how we want to proceed.  At that point, we would break out of the feedback loop with the business requirements in hand, and go to work designing the code.  Upon completion of the code analysis, we may have to reenter the project plan to adjust for technical implications, and enter that informed feedback loop again.  At some point we would arrive at the code development phase, and in theory the deliverable from that phase would end the project phase III, and begin the maintenance phase in which we add features.
I would like to point out that this process will certainly not be linear, but cyclical.  We may get to the end of phase three and have to go back to the project phase to make changes or additions that cause refactoring or redoing the code analysis and therefore the code itself.

As your ideas are considered and as we attempt to enroll them into the project plan, I will be working on concurrent analyses to evaluate and attempt to quantify or qualify the impact of those on the facets of the project such as the timeline, the scope, and the budget.  That will give us some solid standing upon which to decide what to include and what to exclude.  Again, phase III is purposed to be about delivering a working, basic coin.

I'd like to briefly address your ideas in general.  We will endeavour to listen to all comers, with all ideas.  There will be some ideas that will be embraced by the community, and some that will be rejected by the community.  Within reason, I will be adding these ideas to the project (though I will be reserving the right to combine similar suggestions into a simpler overarching one).  That does not mean your ideas will be included as features, but that they will be documented.  

Whether the ideas are accepted or rejected, the rationale for that acceptance or rejection will be described in writing.  The reason for this is the eternal nature of ideas.  Some ideas, I grant you, are just plain bad ideas, objectively.  But I've seen many ideas that having been rejected for one project or phase, ended up being incorporated as a solution to a problem or challenge elsewhere.  I have personally borrowed ideas from an unrelated project to solve problems in a new project.  You never know when an idea will blossom, and the purpose here is to capture the idea, even if we keep it captive until it is needed.


kind regards,
nio

[fragout]

Welcome aboard. I enjoyed reading your introduction.
As we are at the beginning of the project, may I suggest some rules to follow for the Dev team.
 Dont announce dates of when specific features or release will be unless you are 100% sure you can make it. Regular updates on progress (weekly should be ok) even if there is no significant progress made the previous week.
 Logo thread with submissions from the community followed by a vote at a certain date (you would be amazed at the hassle logos can cause if the selection is not done properly).
I know a lot of these things are are a long way off but these are some of the major issues I have seen from other coin launches.

[nioccoin]

I get what your saying, and we all signed up for Kora, a clone of Qora.

Just saying Qora isn't doing all that great.

NEM started off with the same intention, to clone Nxt. If they did that, they would have been tiny, like NAS.

Just saying no one thought Kora was going to be some top ten crypto. That's for sure. But its going to be great and fun. It has a great community already. This happened with NEM. They did the switch, decided to write the code from scratch. Yes, of course they still used a lot of the same stuff in the code where it made since, but also made their code, their own, and became not a copy of Nxt, but took their inspiration from Nxt.

NEM will launch in the top ten of all cryptos.

Just saying, if you have the skills to write Kora it's own code. You would make history. Kora would be BETTER than Qora.

You would have a great community behind you. And if you can do it, and have the time, I'm sure the Kora community wouldn't mind you using the amount of stakes saved for the dev fund with NEM as a yardstick for Kora.

Just saying, you might surprise yourself, and come up with something even more unique than originally planned. Think about it. You would be compensated well for doing this for us. (See NEM Development Contract for reference)

Anyway, whatever we do, I am happy to see such a great and talented person as yourself becoming a part of this community, in such an important role!!!


Thank You,



Chris

Hi Chris, thank you for your insightful comments.  I can't say I disagree with you on any of those points, except my vision is for Kora to be a top-ten crypto

Correct me if I'm wrong:  Your suggestion seems to be "hybridize the code", making it part original and part rote, and that would split the difference?

Building this idea out a bit, we could clone parts of a coin, the "mission critical" parts such as staking, algorithms, etc.  This is the stuff that it makes no sense to write from scratch, because the security implications will drag out the testing, delivery, and make it subject to code review requests.  By cloning the critical parts of a "known good" coin (or coins), we dodge a few time-consuming bullets.  Then, we would build a working proof of concept, and use that as a jumping off place to start innovating.

I will add this to the project plan, as a candidate solution to the issue of cloning Qora.  If you could confirm I have correctly interpreted your suggestion, I would appreciate it.

If anyone sees any problems with such an approach, or has any addendums to this suggestion, speak up and I will incorporate them into the plan.

kind thanks,
nio

[moffer5]

The advantage of a formal project approach is it will help us to discuss the project in a holistic manner, to make certain we neither miss any opportunities, nor take any license we may later regret.  But most importantly, it will help us to scope the project, so that we stay within the project's boundaries and in so doing we will (hopefully) not have to slip the schedule.  The Kora Coin deliverable doesn't mean the project ends, it merely means it enters a new project phase in which we embellish our creation with new features that set Kora above competing coins.  And the final phase is "rinse and repeat" as many times as is needed.

How formal a project approach are you considering? It sounds like you are going to use some sort of software development lifecycle. Will you be using use cases to begin with, or do you think that is going over the top?

[lexicon]

Oh yeah baby!!

 

Here we go!!!!

[libivan]

Great coin. I am so happy to be with you!

Thank you!

[Kora]

Oh yeah baby!!

 

Here we go!!!!

haha, another guy like me with that "Oh yeah baby!!" spring in his step!!

Kora (and reading nioccoin dev posts) are good for your health

[DarkhorseofNxt]

While this is being done, please start working on the logo. I have seen a btt logo designer. His handle is pipipipopopo. His logos are very professional. You can see his works in viacoin logo design and cat logo design. Beautiful works. To be fair, have a logo design competition and invite him too. Lets not waste much time on the logo designing when its time to do that.

[Deviant1]

Very comprehensive game plan! I'm glad you guys are steering the ship on this project, happy to be a part of it! 

[gvans]

While this is being done, please start working on the logo. I have seen a btt logo designer. His handle is pipipipopopo. His logos are very professional. You can see his works in viacoin logo design and cat logo design. Beautiful works. To be fair, have a logo design competition and invite him too. Lets not waste much time on the logo designing when its time to do that.

I'd be happy to chip in my ideas too for the logo. Links to some of my designs in my signature. But as mentioned here and previously by user fragout...

 Logo thread with submissions from the community followed by a vote at a certain date (you would be amazed at the hassle logos can cause if the selection is not done properly).

...a proper selection-process should be executed once there are good submissions. Having said that, I have witnessed some questionable reasoning and decisions made by coin-communities for their logos. When it comes to educated taste and understanding graphic design there usually is some misunderstanding of these principles among the average crypto-users. So one other way would maybe be that the devs just make the decision if they feel they are competent enough. That would save a lot of the hassle too if this decision process was set from the start. Also maybe another thread for the logo and marketing, or is it too early for that?

No, not everyone can code and review a code. Neither can everyone do graphic design and judge logos imo

[Kora]

While this is being done, please start working on the logo. I have seen a btt logo designer. His handle is pipipipopopo. His logos are very professional. You can see his works in viacoin logo design and cat logo design. Beautiful works. To be fair, have a logo design competition and invite him too. Lets not waste much time on the logo designing when its time to do that.

I'd be happy to chip in my ideas too for the logo. Links to some of my designs in my signature. But as mentioned here and previously by user fragout...

 Logo thread with submissions from the community followed by a vote at a certain date (you would be amazed at the hassle logos can cause if the selection is not done properly).

...a proper selection-process should be executed once there are good submissions. Having said that, I have witnessed some questionable reasoning and decisions made by coin-communities for their logos. When it comes to educated taste and understanding graphic design there usually is some misunderstanding of these principles among the average crypto-users. So one other way would maybe be that the devs just make the decision if they feel they are competent enough. That would save a lot of the hassle too if this decision process was set from the start. Also maybe another thread for the logo and marketing, or is it too early for that?

No, not everyone can code and review a code. Neither can everyone do graphic design and judge logos imo

Good post, thanks!

A great logo is very important, and we'll do our best to ensure Kora has excellent 'branding'. As nioccoin will be working on the website first I'm sure he will have more to say about things like the logo & design style very soon. Translating the Kora 'vibe' into a logo and design might take some time though, but I agree with nio that it is a good project for the community to start with.

I know how Kora 'feels' to me - Kora is simple & effective & universal. By that I mean I hope Kora will be everything it needs to be, but nothing more, nothing unnecessary. I don't like to add things for the sake of it. I want Kora to be a bit Zen, but that's just me, and I'm sure others have very different ideas about Kora.

My design preference is K.I.S.S - 'keep it simple stupid', and I extend that idea of 'keeping things simple' to how we organise the community.

That's why I'm a big fan of the Starfish method of organisation over the traditional Spider.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Starfish_and_the_Spider
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nJ3JCDI4yQIN2O09DW6qApRhPrQXDj9wsxY-3jduOAw/edit?hl=en

Starfish organisations are decentralised & regenerative, so they are very lean & simple, but highly effective, and almost impossible to defeat.

[qianhanren]

looks another qora in the future...
wait to see.

[percocet]

Definitely need a built in exchange and market place for Kora when it is launched. The ability to trade without a third part exchange is huge!

[gvans]

Starfish organisations are decentralised & regenerative, so they are very lean & simple, but highly effective, and almost impossible to defeat.

That is IT, a starfish!

initial sketch for logo



  


   

[Pentamon]

Starfish organisations are decentralised & regenerative, so they are very lean & simple, but highly effective, and almost impossible to defeat.

That is IT, a starfish!

initial sketch for logo

  


  

Interesting how the visual image appeals to all of us... I like your orange golden starfish, gvans.
I counted the 'rays' or 'legs'. Five of them... (How could I not like it, with a name like Pentamon?)

How about finding a name that goes with that - it should have five letters. Oh, look, we have Kora already.
Those that find inspiration in a name, could look up the Latin for starfish - class Asteroidia - or search for other names.

Let me come back to the importance of the visual anchor for most of us.
I noticed that quite a bit of discussions about the logo is how our initial discussion here is around the logo, and the importance of it.
As a note to the project managers, maybe we should harvest that force, and give people many diagrams of the design and development process. I suspect that it may be just as important as a 'white paper' for providing us with direction.

I do think however, that neither the name nor the logo should be what makes us choose to spend time on this project.
I think it should be the awesome tool that will ensue, and the awesome community that is formed around it.
It should be the functional software that comes out of it. Alive within the minds of people that see how it benefits their lives.

Right now, we have a lot of different projects competing for our time, and trying to compete for being the first or the best in providing solutions to things we don't even know how to express properly. Ok, maybe some smart dudes around here know how to define them, but the challenge is to express them in such a way that the rest of us can follow and support the project. That is why I like the KISS approach.

However, we should not forget that most of us would like to extend our possibilities:
"Wow, now I can send money quickly and cheaply around the planet, without anybody else having to OK that process."  (decentralized crypto currency)
"Wow, now I can freely trade somethings without anybody else gouging me with trading fees."   (decentralized asset exchange)
"Wow, now I can choose to employ an algorithm to be my robotic artificial business intelligence."  (distributed autonomous corporations doing business)

What else am I missing?

(besides the less endearing possibilities:
"wow, look how can I lose some NXT by sending it to a random address - I just dropped money onto the ocean floor"
"Wow, look how I can (be) scam(med)."
or: "Wow, look how I can pump and dump"

Pentamon

[nioccoin]

However, we should not forget that most of us would like to extend our possibilities:
"Wow, now I can send money quickly and cheaply around the planet, without anybody else having to OK that process."  (decentralized crypto currency)
"Wow, now I can freely trade somethings without anybody else gouging me with trading fees."   (decentralized asset exchange)
"Wow, now I can choose to employ an algorithm to be my robotic artificial business intelligence."  (distributed autonomous corporations doing business)

Yes!  This is precisely what we will be doing with great vigour in the near future - working out what Kora will "look like".  Each of these points speaks to a potential problem or challenge that we may attempt to solve.

What else am I missing?

Hopefully we will have an insightful project process that will make certain that we miss very little, and what we do miss will be much less significant to the success of Kora.  This is exactly the kind of critical thinking we will be doing.  Good software practices question themselves, to make the processes better.  Introspection is superb.

(besides the less endearing possibilities:
"wow, look how can I lose some NXT by sending it to a random address - I just dropped money onto the ocean floor"
"Wow, look how I can (be) scam(med)."
or: "Wow, look how I can pump and dump"

Bravo!  You have demonstrated exactly one of the ideals we are trying to capture in Kora, which is thinking critically about what makes a coin "good" or "bad", and of course how to embrace the good and jettison the bad.  Is there a technical, or a business, solution to these project goals and risks?  I have no idea.  But that is what we will try to discover.

kind regards,
nio

[nioccoin]

The advantage of a formal project approach is it will help us to discuss the project in a holistic manner, to make certain we neither miss any opportunities, nor take any license we may later regret.  But most importantly, it will help us to scope the project, so that we stay within the project's boundaries and in so doing we will (hopefully) not have to slip the schedule.  The Kora Coin deliverable doesn't mean the project ends, it merely means it enters a new project phase in which we embellish our creation with new features that set Kora above competing coins.  And the final phase is "rinse and repeat" as many times as is needed.

How formal a project approach are you considering? It sounds like you are going to use some sort of software development lifecycle. Will you be using use cases to begin with, or do you think that is going over the top?

Certainly not over the top, and they are effective irrespective of whether the project is formal or informal.  I prefer text-based use cases.  I've used them in even simple projects.  Yes, we will be using them at some point in the process.  That will be in a later phase when we analyze the requirements of the system we desire to build.  That doesn't mean we will create a use case for every single use scenario, but we will at the least try to hit the important system interactions.

Use cases are awesome.  It's like walking a mile in the system user's shoes, or a business process's shoes.  It allows you to deep dive into a process, and discover many of the ways it can fail or succeed.

kind regards,
nio

[paul.r.k]

"Re: Kora BTT ID Confirmation Topic"
There is no "reply" button and I can't post comments there.
Do I have to post there to get my stake?

[Kora]

"Re: Kora BTT ID Confirmation Topic"
There is no "reply" button and I can't post comments there.
Do I have to post there to get my stake?

The confirmation thread was locked by forum mods so to confirm you need to send Mac Red a PM.

Thanks

[Mac Red]

Starfish organisations are decentralised & regenerative, so they are very lean & simple, but highly effective, and almost impossible to defeat.

That is IT, a starfish!

initial sketch for logo



  


   

Very nice idea for a logo IMO.

[Kora]

Starfish organisations are decentralised & regenerative, so they are very lean & simple, but highly effective, and almost impossible to defeat.

That is IT, a starfish!

initial sketch for logo



  


    

Very nice idea for a logo IMO.

I agree 100% The starfish shape also reminds me of a cog in a machine, so that shape says "organic decentralised machine" to me, which is pretty cool

[MyPotPlantDied]

Starfish organisations are decentralised & regenerative, so they are very lean & simple, but highly effective, and almost impossible to defeat.

That is IT, a starfish!

initial sketch for logo



  


    

Very nice idea for a logo IMO.

I agree 100% The starfish shape also reminds me of a cog in a machine, so that shape says "organic decentralised machine" to me, which is pretty cool

I agree, I love the logo - it is like a cog from nature! Great job gvans!

[gvans]

Thank for your kind comments. Let's see where it goes, whether the final one is starfish or something different . Also in the long run there are no final logos, like for example the evolution of Shell-logo


However feel free to use the "cog" where ever you feel like

[schnötzel]

The logo is great!
What about new name? Maybe "starfish"  

[gvans]

The logo is great!
What about new name? Maybe "starfish"  

 Coral ?

Dunno, Kora is nice. It has kinda zen in it and does not really associate too much with qora in my mind.

[schnötzel]

The logo is great!
What about new name? Maybe "starfish" 

 Coral ?

Dunno, Kora is nice. It has kinda zen in it and does not really associate too much with qora in my mind.

Kora is nice, no question. But two coins with same name isn´t good. If both of them are successful, people will say:

Jill: Do you know Kora
Bob: Which Qora do you mean? With an "K" or the real one?

Know what i mean?

[bitsire]

The logo is great!
What about new name? Maybe "starfish" 

 Coral ?

Dunno, Kora is nice. It has kinda zen in it and does not really associate too much with qora in my mind.

Kora is nice, no question. But two coins with same name isn´t good. If both of them are successful, people will say:

Jill: Do you know Kora
Bob: Which Qora do you mean? With an "K" or the real one?

Know what i mean?

I do know what you mean and I feel the same way. Confusion between coin names isn't good.

[old fart]

There were a lot of people who disagreed with the decision to call a coin lightcoin when litecoin already existed. I can see how easily it could lead to confusion.

[qiwoman2]

I just wanted to welcome the LOVELY NEW DEV in helping with the KORA DIRECTIVE..I may not be a nerd at all but this coin will shine.

[DarkhorseofNxt]

Starfish organisations are decentralised & regenerative, so they are very lean & simple, but highly effective, and almost impossible to defeat.

That is IT, a starfish!

initial sketch for logo



  


    

Very nice idea for a logo IMO.

I agree 100% The starfish shape also reminds me of a cog in a machine, so that shape says "organic decentralised machine" to me, which is pretty cool

I agree, I love the logo - it is like a cog from nature! Great job gvans!

Gvans - while they are discussing on the names etc, how about you play a little with the starfish. Maybe borders? Give 2 colours. Not like "shell" logo, but something professional looking colors/ corporate colors. Stuff like that. Play around with it. You will find something better than this current one.

[gvans]

Gvans - while they are discussing on the names etc, how about you play a little with the starfish. Maybe borders? Give 2 colours. Not like "shell" logo, but something professional looking colors/ corporate colors. Stuff like that. Play around with it. You will find something better than this current one.

Rather busy atm but will try something later on

[dadingsda]

Gvans - while they are discussing on the names etc, how about you play a little with the starfish. Maybe borders? Give 2 colours. Not like "shell" logo, but something professional looking colors/ corporate colors. Stuff like that. Play around with it. You will find something better than this current one.

Rather busy atm but will try something later on

Great!


ps: Nice work so far

[Anna!]

Hey what about these.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/hqdxssoukx0p62b/korastarfish.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/fqf0b1tdgh626or/BD.png

[hypersire]

The second one looks too much like some sort of religious symbol.

I like the simplicity of the original.

[Spayse]

Hey what about these.

This logo is nice design. I'm very like it.

[DarkhorseofNxt]

I didnt mean this. A border around the starfish so it can be seen if its a small logo. The border between white and orange cant be seen sometimes.

[DarkhorseofNxt]

Lesson to be learned :

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/price-speculation/5480/

A stakeholder in Nxt got robbed 1170 btc and 6 mil nxt today. Totalling almost usd 1,000,000.

Dear nio,

I hope security will be the utmost priority during this coins development.

[nioccoin]

Lesson to be learned :

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/price-speculation/5480/

A stakeholder in Nxt got robbed 1170 btc and 6 mil nxt today. Totalling almost usd 1,000,000.

Dear nio,

I hope security will be the utmost priority during this coins development.

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/price-speculation/msg62453/#msg62453

Just based on this info, there may have been some poor defensive measures in play.  Too bad for KLee though.  Hi KLee, wherever you are, whoever you are, my condolences.

Security is a project risk.  For NXT, this does not seem to be a systemic problem with their code, though I will withhold judgement until more details emerge.  A few months ago I read an article that something like 5% of all bitcoin has been stolen, since bitcoin's inception.  Doesn't seem like much, but 5% of today's market cap is big money.  Big money attracts scoundrels.  Unlike in the real world, in the virtual world, the bad guys don't get caught.  There is no downside to stealing cryptocoins.  In the real world, if 5% of something was stolen, at least some would be recovered, and perhaps most of it.
So here is where we are at.  The world hasn't changed.  There are still no less thieves than there were hundreds of years ago.  But the methods have changed.

In some respects, the very things we all like about cryptos are its very weaknesses.  No regulation?  Great, until an exchange like mt gox, or sharex disappears with your coins.

Anonymity?  That's great, until you realize how trivial it is for someone to fence stolen coins.  In the old days, you steal some jewels, and you have to follow a protocol to unload them.  The greatest disincentive to the thief is 10M in jewels is only worth 1M, or much less.  Still an enticement, but nobody is going to pay full price for their hot goods.  But crypto currency?  You get FULL PRICE on the market, because the same anonymity that protects you, also protects the bad guys.

In other words, cryptocurrencies are natively "bearer instruments", just like cash.  But like credit card numbers, they allow someone to steal a huge amount all at once off of a database server.  Cryptocoins are essentially cash.  If you have a 100 quid, do you parade down the street and wave it around like a flag?  No.  You hide it in your sock, or put it in your pocket, or your wallet, or whatever.  With money and other valuables, the first instinct is to hide or otherwise protect it.



Security begins in the planning phase, not in the development phase.  I hear developers all the time who say "let's add in some security to the product."  Sorry, but if you already have a product that is more than 50% finished, your chances of making it secure are slim to none.  Better to start over.



What separates Kora from most other coins is that we are putting in place a formal and public project plan.  Most coins only open-source their code.  We are going a step further.  To put it differently, we are "crowd-sourcing" our project assumptions, project risks, and candidate solutions, so that the community - you - can help strengthen Kora with your input and ideas.  And like your instinct to protect your quid, or your yuan, or your dollar, Kora's first instinct is to guard stakeholder value.  I have some ideas on how to "build security in" to Kora.  Undoubtedly you do to, and that is what this thread is for.


When the plan is released, and the community sees it, it will be vetted.  My hope is it will be torn to shreds, and have every assumption and candidate solution scrutinized for error.  Ultimately, isn't it better that the plan is shredded and problems are ironed out, than to have the coin itself scrutinized, when it is too late to fix the errors?  It's easier to change the blueprint than the building.


You don't have to wait for the project plan.  Feel free to chime in now on what you think are security issues with crypto, and any ideas on how they can be solved.  I will then add them to the plan.  Since this is a crucial topic, let's keep the *formal* discussion open for a few days, and collect ideas.  We will always do our best to respond to criticisms and ideas throughout Kora's lifetime.
Many of you probably own coins, and some of you own a great many coins, or perhaps a great volume of one coin.  Maybe you have concerns about the weaknesses in those other coins.  Let's hear them!

kind regards,
nio

[DarkhorseofNxt]

Is it possible to integrate 2FA with wallet?

[Kora]

Lesson to be learned :

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/price-speculation/5480/

A stakeholder in Nxt got robbed 1170 btc and 6 mil nxt today. Totalling almost usd 1,000,000.

Dear nio,

I hope security will be the utmost priority during this coins development.

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/price-speculation/msg62453/#msg62453

Just based on this info, there may have been some poor defensive measures in play.  Too bad for KLee though.  Hi KLee, wherever you are, whoever you are, my condolences.

Security is a project risk.  For NXT, this does not seem to be a systemic problem with their code, though I will withhold judgement until more details emerge.  A few months ago I read an article that something like 5% of all bitcoin has been stolen, since bitcoin's inception.  Doesn't seem like much, but 5% of today's market cap is big money.  Big money attracts scoundrels.  Unlike in the real world, in the virtual world, the bad guys don't get caught.  There is no downside to stealing cryptocoins.  In the real world, if 5% of something was stolen, at least some would be recovered, and perhaps most of it.
So here is where we are at.  The world hasn't changed.  There are still no less thieves than there were hundreds of years ago.  But the methods have changed.

In some respects, the very things we all like about cryptos are its very weaknesses.  No regulation?  Great, until an exchange like mt gox, or sharex disappears with your coins.

Anonymity?  That's great, until you realize how trivial it is for someone to fence stolen coins.  In the old days, you steal some jewels, and you have to follow a protocol to unload them.  The greatest disincentive to the thief is 10M in jewels is only worth 1M, or much less.  Still an enticement, but nobody is going to pay full price for their hot goods.  But crypto currency?  You get FULL PRICE on the market, because the same anonymity that protects you, also protects the bad guys.

In other words, cryptocurrencies are natively "bearer instruments", just like cash.  But like credit card numbers, they allow someone to steal a huge amount all at once off of a database server.  Cryptocoins are essentially cash.  If you have a 100 quid, do you parade down the street and wave it around like a flag?  No.  You hide it in your sock, or put it in your pocket, or your wallet, or whatever.  With money and other valuables, the first instinct is to hide or otherwise protect it.



Security begins in the planning phase, not in the development phase.  I hear developers all the time who say "let's add in some security to the product."  Sorry, but if you already have a product that is more than 50% finished, your chances of making it secure are slim to none.  Better to start over.



What separates Kora from most other coins is that we are putting in place a formal and public project plan.  Most coins only open-source their code.  We are going a step further.  To put it differently, we are "crowd-sourcing" our project assumptions, project risks, and candidate solutions, so that the community - you - can help strengthen Kora with your input and ideas.  And like your instinct to protect your quid, or your yuan, or your dollar, Kora's first instinct is to guard stakeholder value.  I have some ideas on how to "build security in" to Kora.  Undoubtedly you do to, and that is what this thread is for.


When the plan is released, and the community sees it, it will be vetted.  My hope is it will be torn to shreds, and have every assumption and candidate solution scrutinized for error.  Ultimately, isn't it better that the plan is shredded and problems are ironed out, than to have the coin itself scrutinized, when it is too late to fix the errors?  It's easier to change the blueprint than the building.


You don't have to wait for the project plan.  Feel free to chime in now on what you think are security issues with crypto, and any ideas on how they can be solved.  I will then add them to the plan.  Since this is a crucial topic, let's keep the *formal* discussion open for a few days, and collect ideas.  We will always do our best to respond to criticisms and ideas throughout Kora's lifetime.
Many of you probably own coins, and some of you own a great many coins, or perhaps a great volume of one coin.  Maybe you have concerns about the weaknesses in those other coins.  Let's hear them!

kind regards,
nio

Thanks for a great post nio!!

I've had a few minor dealings with Klee in the past (not using this 'Kora' account though), and I always found him to be a very constructive and honest guy with a very advanced appreciation of the power of a decentralised 'community'. I was actually unable to sleep last night for thinking about his situation, and on a human level it is truly devastating and I send him all the good vibes I can from a distance. NXT owes a lot to Klee, and I hope he can rise above this personal tragedy.

As for security, one thing I like about my bank account is I have a maximum daily withdrawal limit on my account of 5K, so if my account was compromised the attacker could only get 5K per day until I realised. If I want to withdraw more than 5K I have to call my bank and authorise that over the phone. I also like that for a transfer to a new account I need to receive and then enter a code using my mobile phone. Those two features, withdrawal limit & 2FA for new accounts transfers, limit my paranoia about online banking to some degree.

With crypto I would like the ability to freeze some crypto coins in a 'term deposit' type structure where they couldn't be moved for X period of time. For a POS coin if you could 'withdraw freeze' your savings for a few months, then you really could leave your PC on and forge 24/7 without too much stress about having your PC hacked. Having your account pass-phrase in RAM while you forge always worries me.

[DarkhorseofNxt]

Ideas

1. Limit daily transfer set by user. X exceeding certain amount need more confirmation or extra security measures.

2. "Lock" balance. If you are planning not to use the funds for some time, lock it and to unlock it must follow steps from step 1 (extra security measure)

# extra security measure is what we need to think about, verification by email or mobile? Then will it still be called decentralization since now you can be tracked with email or mobile.number? Something to think about.

[beckham]

any update now?

[From Above]

kora to the stars and beyond

~CfA~

[Neo.op]

A simple multisig implementation to start with. I am not sure but I thought that feature alone has the ability to stop many attacks. Even after BTC implementing, other coins seem to be dragging their feet.

[schnötzel]

Ideas

1. Limit daily transfer set by user. X exceeding certain amount need more confirmation or extra security measures.

2. "Lock" balance. If you are planning not to use the funds for some time, lock it and to unlock it must follow steps from step 1 (extra security measure)

# extra security measure is what we need to think about, verification by email or mobile? Then will it still be called decentralization since now you can be tracked with email or mobile.number? Something to think about.

1+2 This would be awesome! Great idea.

#extra security: If it´s optional, why not.

[cryptonikus]

 those logos, seriously...

[feina24h]

those logos, seriously...

i am having the same feeling about those logos.....

[start]

i agree with chirs try something new and please choose another name not Kora 

this name looks very good.don't change.

[Pentamon]

those logos, seriously...

i am having the same feeling about those logos.....

What feelings are those?

Can we not move the logo's to a section for logo design?
Some form of designer corner or logo design competition.

Pentamon

[Pentamon]

Ideas

1. Limit daily transfer set by user. X exceeding certain amount need more confirmation or extra security measures.

2. "Lock" balance. If you are planning not to use the funds for some time, lock it and to unlock it must follow steps from step 1 (extra security measure)

# extra security measure is what we need to think about, verification by email or mobile? Then will it still be called decentralization since now you can be tracked with email or mobile.number? Something to think about.

1+2 This would be awesome! Great idea.

#extra security: If it´s optional, why not.

I also think that these suggestions are great.
I know that not everyone is happy about the abilities and impact of biometrics, but what about leaving the option in for the user to decide which of multiple verification systems they are happy with?
This does not mean that the user could necessarily be tracked by others via their mobile number or whatever is used as an additional verification. I think of it as additional to the private key, and that could mean a second password, a cellphone text or sms, or even some biometric inputs.

Pentamon

[DarkhorseofNxt]

Let security be our strength.

[Victorius]

you should negate everything that was ever critisized in history of crypto. Easy.

[From Above]

u should rebrand kora to a new catchy name- i suggest "Poroshenko"

~CfA~

[Kora]

those logos, seriously...

i am having the same feeling about those logos.....

What feelings are those?

Can we not move the logo's to a section for logo design?
Some form of designer corner or logo design competition.

Pentamon

Good suggestion Pentamon! A logo thread might be fun too. Any logo will need to fit in with nioccoin's website, but we can at least make a start at getting some suggestions.

[nioccoin]

...
Pentamon

Good suggestion Pentamon! A logo thread might be fun too. Any logo will need to fit in with nioccoin's website, but we can at least make a start at getting some suggestions.

Yes, thanks for bringing that up.

As long as the logo is a square dimension, such as a*a, or a round logo, it will fit easily in to the website.  If we somehow end up with a rectangular logo or some oblong shape, which does happen, it will be more difficult to incorporate, but not impossible.  Also, make sure to design in a transparency layer format of some kind, or at least have the ability to export it with transparency.  I can read just about any major file format.

At this point we will just plan to keep the images sort-of generic, and the site design will be switch-selectable in terms of colour scheme.  For instance, the present colour scheme will almost certainly clash if we end up with the aforementioned starfish logo, so I'll try to keep the colours nimble.

kind regards,
nio

[nioccoin]

I've read all of the security considerations thus far, and seen some good ideas.  Does anyone else have anything they would like to offer up as an idea for security?

What I'm looking for is sort-of a  scenario-based or experience-based issue that you've had.  Say you go to your bank to withdraw some money and.....

Everything that completes that sentence in a "bad" way is good material, and identifies a potential problem.  The good stuff  that happens is a potential feature idea.

Or, perhaps you use SomeCoin and when you use their wallet, it....

Again, whatever completes that sentence could be invaluable info.

I'll give it a bit more time, and then I'm going to release the plan.


This is not the end, just the beginning, and I expect this topic will get very hot much later on when we start getting into development, which is not atypical.  I'm just trying to take the community's pulse as-is at present, to get some idea about what direction you all wish to take this.

Kind regards,
nio

[DarkhorseofNxt]

I am just thinking. You will have a passphrase that can be saved anywhere in a pc or paper or phone. So chances for a hacker to get those passphrase is still there, maybe not a very high chance but a minimal chance. But no doubt there is. So i am thinking, how if we add another lets say 3 characters that will act sorta "cvc" number on credit card onto withdrawal password additional to wallet passphrase. Something that you can remember and something you wont need to write down / save it anywhere else.

[Pentamon]

I am just thinking. You will have a passphrase that can be saved anywhere in a pc or paper or phone. So chances for a hacker to get those passphrase is still there, maybe not a very high chance but a minimal chance. But no doubt there is. So i am thinking, how if we add another lets say 3 characters that will act sorta "cvc" number on credit card onto withdrawal password additional to wallet passphrase. Something that you can remember and something you wont need to write down / save it anywhere else.

Yes. Make it a 3 or 4 character 'pin'.  I like the idea.

Another problem that I have, is that once in a while, while working with the NXT/NFD/NHZ passphrase in a copy-paste mode, I accidentally push the middle mouse button on the browser window, and there goes my passphrase to google!  Whoopey!  So much for the 'privacy' of that passphrase. Just look at the one-time google searches, you will find it...

Adding a part of the passphrase manually would be a  solution, I guess.

Pentamon

[Kora]

Kora stakeholder list has been released!

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=620518.msg7876022#msg7876022

[sanbashiyi]

Kora stakeholder list has been released!

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=620518.msg7876022#msg7876022

so good , when will be distributed?

[gvans]

Played a little with the starfish. I made it a little chunkier and gave it some motion and star-like qualities with heated nucleus



       


       

[Purple!]

Very nice gvans! Put a purple border. 

[Kora]

I have started a Logo design discussion & submission thread!

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=697958.new#new

Have fun

[DarkhorseofNxt]

When can we expect updates from nio?

[xyzzyx]

Ora feature request: N of M multisignature accounts/addresses.  At the time of address/account creation, allow specifying an arbitrary M number of keys for an account with an arbitrary N number of signatures where N is of the set {1 .. M}.

The idea is to allow an account's funds to be spent only once N keys have signed the transaction.

(Emulating Bitcoin multisig would involve a M of 3 and a N of 2, for example.)

If this is implemented, it would allow easy integration with the Nxt Multigateway service.

[signingoff]

Can we develop Ora from scratch, not a clone of Qora?
 

[Kora]

Can we develop Ora from scratch, not a clone of Qora?
 

That is possible, but so much great dev work has already been open sourced (e.g. bitcoin, NXT, Ripple), and I think it's wise to review all those projects first, and then develop a road map for ORA. Where we end up is unknown at this time, but as this project develops I think it'll be less likely that ORA is a straight clone of Qora. Once Qora is open sourced we should review it and use the parts of it that are useful. In the end we will be guided by nioccoin, and all those who join with him!

[nioccoin]

When can we expect updates from nio?

Hi, I'm lurking, absorbing the roadsigns for what direction the community is taking everything.

Already, in the past couple of weeks it looks like we have gone from kora to ora, and a logo contest is wide open.

This began as an "organic" system, and remains that way.  Ora has taken on a life of its own, which is what we want anyway.  The community is driving it forward in spurts.  We are now seeing more folks becoming involved.  I'm seeing some new names take the reigns of parts of Ora and drive it in creative directions.

As new ideas and directions emerge, I am modifying my own processes to fit them in to the master plan.

kind regards,
nio

[Kora]

When can we expect updates from nio?

Hi, I'm lurking, absorbing the roadsigns for what direction the community is taking everything.

Already, in the past couple of weeks it looks like we have gone from kora to ora, and a logo contest is wide open.

This began as an "organic" system, and remains that way.  Ora has taken on a life of its own, which is what we want anyway.  The community is driving it forward in spurts.  We are now seeing more folks becoming involved.  I'm seeing some new names take the reigns of parts of Ora and drive it in creative directions.

As new ideas and directions emerge, I am modifying my own processes to fit them in to the master plan.

kind regards,
nio

Thanks nio!! Stay in the dev cocoon as long as you need There's enough to do with the distribution to keep the rest of us busy for a while!

[lexicon]

The major downfall, or at least something that I think has hurt coins and communities, is the process taking toooooo looooong at each step.

I see it in NEM and NODE. They have lost a lot of community members that were at one point very involved. Then new comers show up and they contribute for awhile until they get sick of of the waiting.

If Ora can stay on a steady pace and pick up ACTIVE members and NOT lose them along the way this would make Ora fairly powerful.

My advice is to keep things moving. Regular updates with where we were, were we are at now, and where we are going next, and in the future.

Like now, what have we done, and what are we doing now.

something like

kora started, had ipo of whatever we call it, nico came, changed to ora, now were doing logo, x y and z is next.

Lets keep this thing from stalling, that happens to all coins, but if we can stay on top of trying to make sure this doesnt' happen would be good.

[jshow5555]

@nioccoin

If you have to use somebody else’s code, which in itself is something I am not 100% sure you should do, why not use the best one available. As of today it seems to be Bitshares (i.e. DPOS). Just check and make your own decision, but this are my 2c.

[Kora]

The major downfall, or at least something that I think has hurt coins and communities, is the process taking toooooo looooong at each step.

I see it in NEM and NODE. They have lost a lot of community members that were at one point very involved. Then new comers show up and they contribute for awhile until they get sick of of the waiting.

If Ora can stay on a steady pace and pick up ACTIVE members and NOT lose them along the way this would make Ora fairly powerful.

My advice is to keep things moving. Regular updates with where we were, were we are at now, and where we are going next, and in the future.

Like now, what have we done, and what are we doing now.

something like

kora started, had ipo of whatever we call it, nico came, changed to ora, now were doing logo, x y and z is next.

Lets keep this thing from stalling, that happens to all coins, but if we can stay on top of trying to make sure this doesnt' happen would be good.

Some good suggestions here, thanks! I think communication is a vital component for ORA, and if anyone wants to step up and start performing that duty, jump right in

I probably have a slightly different take on the time horizon for projects though, as I am a firm believer that quality outcomes usually take time. The cycle of plan, organise resources, execute, get feedback, re-evaluate ... then repeat ... often needs many iterations until you get a good outcome. If during those cycles there is no communication then people can sometimes start to assume nothing is happening, and then critics pop up screaming scam and/or vaporware.

For me the key is to keep the communication flowing, but don't cut corners for the sake of getting something out too early to keep people happy.

If I look at the current crypto scene I can think of some high quality projects that set deadlines, and didn't meet them, and they've suffered perception problems as a result. eMunie is probably the best example. It's obvious to me that eMunie is a serious competitor to bitcoin, NXT, ethereum, bitshares, mastercoin, counterparty etc etc, but the eMunie team originally gave an impression that they were really close to launching in Feb 2014, but that was too optimistic, and they copped a lot of scam & vaporware flak. The good thing is they learnt their lesson and they've been beavering away in private now for months. When they reappear they'll be serious competition with a quality product & professional marketing, but now they've gone to the opposite extreme and there's very little communication, even on their own forum. IMO it's better to not over promise and set deadlines, but still have regular updates to let supporters & investors know what's happening.

I know in the crypto world time moves A LOT faster, but that's not a good thing IMO, and we can resist the pressure. A good example is Slimcoin, which is a really interesting coin using proof-of-burn mining which doesn't take huge PC resources. I think the Slimcoin dev is trying hard to do something innovative and potentially very important with PoB, but he's probably got a full time job & family committments, and Slimcoin is *probably* a part-time project he does in his spare time. If you check out the Slimcoin thread the poor guy gets insulted and abused all the time for being slow with bug fixes, or for taking a while to respond to forum questions etc. We all know crypto is about "money", so a coin dev needs to respect that people who invest in their coins are going to be unhappy if they get too flakey, but sometimes I think people expect too much when it's obvious people aren't working full time on a project because they didn't have an IPO.

I guess all start-ups are hoping for enough resources to work full-time to get off the ground, but probably a lot of coin devs on this forum would be working other jobs. That's the big advantage of an IPO, but as we've chosen to go with FREE stakes and try and create value as we go to compensate people, things will take longer.

I'm not sure what the perfect dev path is for a crypto start-up. Bigger projects like ethereum or bitshares make heaps of money from their IPO's to pay lots of people to work full-time, but I think the scope for damage to the whole crypto community is massive if they fail and investors lose lots of money. I know the eEmunie dev is living off of his savings to pay for the 18+ months of dev time, but how many guys could live that long with no income? I don't think there's a perfect dev model in the unregulated crypto start up scene yet. Lots of cowboys & scammers, and obviously no regulators (which is what most of us want).


Once the dev side of things gets going I'd like to have a big focus on 'communication', and I'd be advocating for power bounties to be set aside soon to compensate whoever steps up for that roll. I like the way Monero have a periodic update posted. We could do the same.


edit: Once we have a website and maybe our own forum, communication will be a lot better. Lots of 'chicken & egg' here lol Community gets bigger when there's more stuff going on, but without lots of people pitching in & helping things progress slowly

[Yuzu]

Waiting and watching.

[Xpedite]

Just a question regarding the NXT address.
I had created a NXT wallet through mynxt.info which I asked about early in the announcement thread. The reply then was that if the address showed up in the blockchain that everything should be ok.
However, now I am realising that it is not possible to use the AE feature of NXT with the mynxt.info so how would it be possible to transfer the ORA stake with such a wallet???

Please educate me 

[ShroomsKit_Disgrace]

Just a question regarding the NXT address.
I had created a NXT wallet through mynxt.info which I asked about early in the announcement thread. The reply then was that if the address showed up in the blockchain that everything should be ok.
However, now I am realising that it is not possible to use the AE feature of NXT with the mynxt.info so how would it be possible to transfer the ORA stake with such a wallet???

Please educate me 

Just use the "official" client from here:

http://nxtra.org/nxt-wallet/

Smooth and easy client, IMH

[lexicon]

The major downfall, or at least something that I think has hurt coins and communities, is the process taking toooooo looooong at each step.

I see it in NEM and NODE. They have lost a lot of community members that were at one point very involved. Then new comers show up and they contribute for awhile until they get sick of of the waiting.

If Ora can stay on a steady pace and pick up ACTIVE members and NOT lose them along the way this would make Ora fairly powerful.

My advice is to keep things moving. Regular updates with where we were, were we are at now, and where we are going next, and in the future.

Like now, what have we done, and what are we doing now.

something like

kora started, had ipo of whatever we call it, nico came, changed to ora, now were doing logo, x y and z is next.

Lets keep this thing from stalling, that happens to all coins, but if we can stay on top of trying to make sure this doesnt' happen would be good.

Some good suggestions here, thanks! I think communication is a vital component for ORA, and if anyone wants to step up and start performing that duty, jump right in

I probably have a slightly different take on the time horizon for projects though, as I am a firm believer that quality outcomes usually take time. The cycle of plan, organise resources, execute, get feedback, re-evaluate ... then repeat ... often needs many iterations until you get a good outcome. If during those cycles there is no communication then people can sometimes start to assume nothing is happening, and then critics pop up screaming scam and/or vaporware.

For me the key is to keep the communication flowing, but don't cut corners for the sake of getting something out too early to keep people happy.

If I look at the current crypto scene I can think of some high quality projects that set deadlines, and didn't meet them, and they've suffered perception problems as a result. eMunie is probably the best example. It's obvious to me that eMunie is a serious competitor to bitcoin, NXT, ethereum, bitshares, mastercoin, counterparty etc etc, but the eMunie team originally gave an impression that they were really close to launching in Feb 2014, but that was too optimistic, and they copped a lot of scam & vaporware flak. The good thing is they learnt their lesson and they've been beavering away in private now for months. When they reappear they'll be serious competition with a quality product & professional marketing, but now they've gone to the opposite extreme and there's very little communication, even on their own forum. IMO it's better to not over promise and set deadlines, but still have regular updates to let supporters & investors know what's happening.

I know in the crypto world time moves A LOT faster, but that's not a good thing IMO, and we can resist the pressure. A good example is Slimcoin, which is a really interesting coin using proof-of-burn mining which doesn't take huge PC resources. I think the Slimcoin dev is trying hard to do something innovative and potentially very important with PoB, but he's probably got a full time job & family committments, and Slimcoin is *probably* a part-time project he does in his spare time. If you check out the Slimcoin thread the poor guy gets insulted and abused all the time for being slow with bug fixes, or for taking a while to respond to forum questions etc. We all know crypto is about "money", so a coin dev needs to respect that people who invest in their coins are going to be unhappy if they get too flakey, but sometimes I think people expect too much when it's obvious people aren't working full time on a project because they didn't have an IPO.

I guess all start-ups are hoping for enough resources to work full-time to get off the ground, but probably a lot of coin devs on this forum would be working other jobs. That's the big advantage of an IPO, but as we've chosen to go with FREE stakes and try and create value as we go to compensate people, things will take longer.

I'm not sure what the perfect dev path is for a crypto start-up. Bigger projects like ethereum or bitshares make heaps of money from their IPO's to pay lots of people to work full-time, but I think the scope for damage to the whole crypto community is massive if they fail and investors lose lots of money. I know the eEmunie dev is living off of his savings to pay for the 18+ months of dev time, but how many guys could live that long with no income? I don't think there's a perfect dev model in the unregulated crypto start up scene yet. Lots of cowboys & scammers, and obviously no regulators (which is what most of us want).


Once the dev side of things gets going I'd like to have a big focus on 'communication', and I'd be advocating for power bounties to be set aside soon to compensate whoever steps up for that roll. I like the way Monero have a periodic update posted. We could do the same.


edit: Once we have a website and maybe our own forum, communication will be a lot better. Lots of 'chicken & egg' here lol Community gets bigger when there's more stuff going on, but without lots of people pitching in & helping things progress slowly

Less interest equals less value, especially a coin like this. You might just want to be careful what your wishing for with this outlook.

Moving too slow is killing a lot of communities. Your trying to build one admitting that your willing to accept this tradeoff.

And just because things move at a steady pace, doesn't mean quality has to be sacrificed. Organization, and yes communication, can accomplish this.

What are the bottlenecks now? How do we solve them? What is the status of development tech wise? If you keep things moving you will gain momentum that your competitors lack. Quality doesn't have to be sacrificed.

Things just cant stall. Rinse and repeat too many times, doesn't leave you with gold around here. But also, I am not speaking of haste.

As for communicaton, I would have links to every thread on the front page of every thread.

Great job so far, btw, I am excited. And I'm not a stakeholder. Nor do I think, at this point, should you be giving away free ones anymore. I'll be happy to buy one at an auction, or purchase one from someone else. Value. You already have value, with the addition of Nico, and the integrity of the distribution. Giving them away again, well, that would be suicide at this point.

[Mac Red]

We got an interesting suggestion in the main topic:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=620518.msg8053222#msg8053222

What do you guys and nio think of this? Sounds like a pretty nice idea IMO.

[gvans]

We got an interesting suggestion in the main topic:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=620518.msg8053222#msg8053222

What do you guys and nio think of this? Sounds like a pretty nice idea IMO.

I'm not familiar with Bitshares but it's another POS system afaik. Anyhow was just going to give another idea what to do with the leftover stakes instead of just distributing them to current stakeholders. There must be more effective ways to make use of them than just throw them out to be holded or traded.

Fimk (based on nxt) has a good working model imo. They introduced Extra POS rewards, i.e. every block has a good reward and big amount from genesis block is distributed to those who keep their wallets running and the network healthy. Now I'm only a small fish in nxt and fimk but I really do keep my fimk wallet running 24/7 to make the most of the extra pos rewards which totally is not the case with my nxt-wallet with tiny little bit of nxt I only could make from POS-forging.

Take a look: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=633304.0

So maybe you could use the majority of leftovers for extra POS rewards. It's a fine distribution model. Still a smaller free secondary distribution could be launched later on to get more people involved, but I'd recommend those stakes to be way smaller stakes than the current distributed ones. Why? Because if the second round is 1 to 1 with the first one that would only make the current holders to create sockpuppets to acquire more Ora. Maybe 1/20 of current stakes could be the size of a stake in the second round of distribution (more like an email-giveaway or national airdrop-size). And that secondary distribution should take place after a good while when Ora has gained more credibility. At least after delivering a good white paper and webpage, preferably after launch maybe.

edit: also the possibility of another round of free big stakes would dig the ground under current trading of stakes in nxt-ae naturally so it must be carefully calculated, I just picked that 1/20 stake randomly

[DarkhorseofNxt]

Hey nioccoin, when can we expect to see a blueprint of your proposal or idea. Would love to see this moving. Are we planning to copy qora or moving into a different direction?

[megashira1]

We have everything QORA ever wanted. Good distribution and good community. We now only need what they have, good dev and good code. 

[Pentamon]

Anyhow was just going to give another idea what to do with the leftover stakes instead of just distributing them to current stakeholders. There must be more effective ways to make use of them than just throw them out to be holded or traded.

Fimk (based on nxt) has a good working model imo. They introduced Extra POS rewards, i.e. every block has a good reward and big amount from genesis block is distributed to those who keep their wallets running and the network healthy. Now I'm only a small fish in nxt and fimk but I really do keep my fimk wallet running 24/7 to make the most of the extra pos rewards which totally is not the case with my nxt-wallet with tiny little bit of nxt I only could make from POS-forging.

Take a look: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=633304.0

So maybe you could use the majority of leftovers for extra POS rewards.

+2880

I'm always forging w/my FIMK, not with my NXT.   Block rewards are a great incentive for stake participation.  My vote for extra distribution of extra stake would have to go towards substantial forging rewards.

I have to agree with you guys.
I have a similar experience, comparing NXT, NFD with NHZ (New Horizon) - the nightly deposits coming in because I run the server all the time, sure makes me smile looking at the NHZ screen, (which is also  clone of NXT).   This is encouraging, even though I own only little amount. I will have to try FIMK, based upon your description here.

Interesting how things are going.
Kudos to the devs, so far.

Pentamon

[laura@@]

I have some ideas.

1.  i remember that BM said he prefer clone bts by himself compared of be cloned by other people.

is it possible that we join 3i as one of their DAC project.  and use the undistributed coins(350M) to agser and ptser.

2. i also have another idea, we can also launch multiple projects. for example, separate 350M of ora to 10 dev teams and each of them will clone one of the popular&main steam coin.    all these projects will honor the position of orz, just like how pts and ags works.
orz will become a clone franchise focus on low end market

[jeniferqueen0409]

When will nioccoin online?
And when will we see a blueprint of his proposal or idea?

[nioccoin]

@nioccoin

If you have to use somebody else’s code, which in itself is something I am not 100% sure you should do, why not use the best one available. As of today it seems to be Bitshares (i.e. DPOS). Just check and make your own decision, but this are my 2c.

We will likely evaluate all of the contenders on their merits.  It is not uncommon to treat modern software engineering like a buffet line.  Ora could borrow any number of lines of code from any number of sources.

I realize that some ppl are skittish about not being original with code.  But in crypto, originality is the kiss of death.  You are better off sticking with well-known and widely-used algos and best practices.  Why?  Because anything "new" needs years of abuse before it can truly be trusted.  Even then, reality gets in a few good licks, like recently happened with heartbleed.

I'm not suggesting that any of these potential clone bases for Ora is using some fresh and original crypto algorithm, because if they are I will steer us away.  I'm merely using this idea to make a finer point, and that is that copying is not always a bad thing, and originality is not always a good thing.  I suspect our final version will be some hybrid of original code and cloned code, probably from multiple sources.

kind regards,
nio

[nioccoin]

The major downfall, or at least something that I think has hurt coins and communities, is the process taking toooooo looooong at each step.

I see it in NEM and NODE. They have lost a lot of community members that were at one point very involved. Then new comers show up and they contribute for awhile until they get sick of of the waiting.

Thanks for your thoughtful comment.

I'd like to agree with you, but I don't, because I question the premise that ppl leave because they get sick of waiting.  That is certainly one reason, and not unfounded.  But there are many reasons why ppl leave a coin, including a new opportunity.  We've all done it.  Most ppl reading this have dropped their bags - even at a loss - to pursue a new coin with a new idea or approach.  Not to say that they didn't get tired of waiting.

I would also like to point out that it is human nature to become impatient with progress, or lack thereof.  But most ppl have no experience of what it is like on the inside of the problem domain.  Everything seems simple, but reality intrudes.  Even shoddy development is immensely complex.  But great development is even more difficult and time-consuming, because by its nature great dev is extensible and scalable.  What scalable means in laymans terms is Ora needs to be capable of being a small crypto system with a small user base, all the way to a worldwide crypto system with billions of users, without causing performance and other issues.  As for extensibility, it needs to be capable of being extended without breaking existing functionality.  That takes careful planning, which in turn takes time.

If Ora can stay on a steady pace and pick up ACTIVE members and NOT lose them along the way this would make Ora fairly powerful.

Almost every complaint I've ever read about a coin comes down to profit.  Ppl want to make money off crypto, and to make money they need to buy low and sell high.  That process is complicated by the coin fundamentals, and the coin development speed.  That's not so different than a tech company promising to release the next big gizmo, in the hopes that they will sell a billion of them.  Even then, the share holders make their own decisions about the viability of the gizmo, or its colour or its capabilities, and sell off or buy in based on those ideas.  They enter or exit based on their assumptions, and those assumptions may be grotesquely wrong, leading to ruin.  Or they could be right, leading to fortune.  Or, they could ride along for years in a sideways market.

I don't dispute the importance of momentum.  However, I don't want to fool myself into thinking that we have that sort of control or power.  Ppl use cryptocurrencies for different purposes.  Some are fanboys, some are institutional investors, and some are swing traders.  Some think that a portion of crypto users are governments trying to swing the free currency movement one way or another in order to corrupt or kill it.
This is a revolving door, and ppl come and go as they see fit, or as Adam Smith would say, as it suits their motive for gain.  That gain is usually but not always monetary.  Some ppl who bought BTC at 5 cents and sold at a dollar thought they made a fortune.  They exited and made very good on their investment.  Others held out and were rewarded with a 900 USD sell, a phenomenal gain.  All of this took three or four years, during which BTC was routinely hyped and disparaged for any number of reasons.  Ppl got upset and fled, and others took their place.

My point is, I fully expect ppl to get off the bus, and those same ppl I fully expect to get back on when the bus comes around again, or when the bus has a better paint job and new mechanicals.  That is Ora.  Those who are not satisfied with baby steps may be inclined to get off the bus and wait until the price goes up again.  Look at all the coins out there.  The most volume is when the coin gets really hot or really cold.  When it's hot, the bulls push the bears into selling high.  When it is cold, the bears pound the bulls into dumping into the floor.  Everyone wants to cheer for the winning team.

Ora, like all other coins, will have its fair-weather fans, who latch on when Ora's growth curve is positive, and get out when things look bleak.  Or, when they need money.  Or any number of reasons.

My advice is to keep things moving. Regular updates with where we were, were we are at now, and where we are going next, and in the future.

We are committed to doing what we can, but not necessarily toward an end that you are expecting.  If I could summarize the theoretical underpinning of Ora, I would have to say: "an overnight success takes a decade of hard work."  Ora is here for the long haul, to build quality.  Quality attracts success.

The ultimate prize in this business is becoming the de-facto e-currency for a new era of money that is not centrally controlled.  That is what all of the serious contenders are vying for.  Some would argue that BTC is already positioned for that.  I'm not convinced.  Lots of 800-kg gorillas have been dethroned by underdogs.  BTC is vulnerable not because it is a bad system, though I see some real problems with it;  BTC is vulnerable for the simple reason that it is the top dog, and eventually one of the hundreds of little dogs nipping at its heels will cause it to stumble and perhaps even crash and burn.

kind regards,
nio

[nioccoin]

If we do end up giving the original stakeholders a top up from the left over stakes I think our only option is to use the original stakeholder list. If somebody chose to sell their stake early it doesn't change the fact that they were an original stakeholder. If a non-stakeholder buys a lot of ORA assets before the vote it doesn't change the fact that they weren't an original stakeholder.

My understanding of the NXT voting system is ALL ORA asset holders would be eligible to vote, even people who weren't original stakeholders but bought ORA on the NXT AE from early sellers.

It would be nice to be able to vote asap, but we don't have any control over when the NXT voting system goes live.

Bytemaster says he can help you clone btsx, whether to consider cloning btsx it?

I think it would be more valuable.

My personal opinion would be guided heavily by the attitude of our lead dev, nioccoin, but I must admit this option does sound like a very interesting avenue to explore!!

DEV,You should consider clone BTS not QORA
1.BTS use C++,it's better than java
2.We don't know when and how will QORA release the resources
3.We have a strong community and BTS have a long term development map.this is win-win
4.In my opnion,BTS is better than QORA

Thanks for your input.

1.  I never wanted to clone Qora for the reason that the native JVM has known issues with real-time data.  I prefer C++ over Java, but could do either.
2.  Yes, Qora's open source timeline is fraught with issues.  Besides the unknown release date, there is a break-in period during which devs tear the code apart looking for security issues and other problems.  That could take days or weeks.  Once the code is OS'd, the blackhats will have their turn to rip it to shreds and sink the ship.  I'm not a fan of closed source in the crypto space, but I understand the motivation to keep the IP close to the devs for a little while anyway.

This brings up an interesting discussion which is: presuming Ora brings some fantastic innovation to the table, what would the community prefer to do with that innovation?
a) Keep the intellectual property closed, thereby protecting the IP.
b)  Keep the IP closed for a short while, thereby protecting the IP until Ora is too far ahead for copycats to catch up to it.
c)  Open it up for all to see (and copy with abandon), thereby risking Ora's innovation right at the start (or strengthening its innovation by subjecting the code to strenuous public review).


As for what to use for a clone, presuming we don't write it from scratch, I'm not sold out on BTS or any other coin base to clone at this point.  But since you brought it up, what do you see that makes BTS better, or the best coin to clone?

[DarkhorseofNxt]

A good comparison chart between bts qora would be nice.

[nioccoin]

I'm not opposed to any direction in which the community wants to take Ora.  But I would like us to examine what is behind these things because beneath every idea or proposed direction, there hides some underlying motivations.

I like ideas.  This is where we begin to crack open problem domains and investigate them.  So, there seems to be some fusion here of stakeholders and contributors who want to clone another coin, particularly bitshares.  Let's pursue this discussion.

Having read every comment in the forum (main thread and dev thread) thus far, here are my observations of the forum proposals:

I.  Orastarfishians (Oras) want to expedite the existence of the Ora cryptocoin.
II.  Oras are wanting to forge alliances with other crypto systems.
III.  Oras are desirous to recruit other and/or more devs to Ora.
IV.  Oras want to clone a coin instead of use a fresh codebase.

There are more, but those seem to be the main things.  Now, here are the Ora questions; some are purely existential.  Pick one or more and answer them.  Or use #15 to add your own and answer it.

1.  Should Ora be a direct clone of another coin at all?
2.  Does it matter if Ora is innovative, or only that it exists?
3.  Should Ora first exist, then innovate later?
4.  Should Ora innovate before it exists? [What I mean is, would the community like to add innovation at Ora's birth, or should it be an exact clone?]
5.  What defines Ora today?
6.  Is what defines Ora today "enough" to sustain it?  For how long?
7.  What should define Ora tomorrow?
8.  Should Ora "come to market" quickly and with less planning?
9.  Should Ora come to market slowly and with more planning? [This is related to question #4]
10. Is Ora's most important feature short-term price, or long-term value?  How best to achieve your preferred answer?
11. What problem is Ora attempting to solve, or what challenge will Ora prevail against?
12. Assuming that Ora clones another coin, what will differentiate Ora from other clones of the same coin?
13.  If Ora comes to market slowly, what is the worst that can happen?  The best?
14.  If Ora comes to market quickly, what is the worst and best that can happen?
15.  Add your own question here, then answer it.

kind regards,
nio

[tonyk]

My 2c.

If you nio, are ready and willing to create the next best original coin go for it!

One question though, tell us how (best case scenario) it will be better than anything currently available?

Do you have a plan, or at least an idea. If yes, let's hear it first.



If you prefer to just clone and/or clone and improve upon, do it with the best available coin. And I will sound like a broken record, but this is BTS as of now, not Qora. To say nothing that BTS is already open source – ready and available to copy/improve upon, while qora’s code will be available at unknown future date.

[tinatinh]

My 2c.

If you nio, are ready and willing to create the next best original coin go for it!

One question though, tell us how (best case scenario) it will be better than anything currently available?

Do you have a plan, or at least an idea. If yes, let's hear it first.

+1 for the original coin.

You should continue your plans and Ora should "come to market" quickly.

[zhile11911]

 following this development post .

    Do whatever you need us .

[fragORA]

1.  Should Ora be a direct clone of another coin at all?
I think cloning is the better option as you have a solid base to work from. The choice of which coin to clone is really one that you feel most comfortable with. Do you wish to handle the project on your own or perhaps join a team?

2.  Does it matter if Ora is innovative, or only that it exists?
Innovative. clone choice is important.

3.  Should Ora first exist, then innovate later?
yes imo

4.  Should Ora innovate before it exists
^^?

5.  What defines Ora today?
fair and free distribution

6.  Is what defines Ora today "enough" to sustain it?  For how long?
Not long, things move fast.

7.  What should define Ora tomorrow?
Solid growing community creating a coin that they want

8.  Should Ora "come to market" quickly and with less planning?
Yes and no. It needs to come to market quickly (as things move fast) which is why i suggested a good clone, but the clone has to be bullet proof with clearly defined goals for innovation stated before launch

9.  Should Ora come to market slowly and with more planning?
^^

10. Is Ora's most important feature short-term price, or long-term value?  How best to achieve your preferred answer?
^^^

[DarkhorseofNxt]

I would go for option b).

[Mac Red]

I.  Orastarfishians (Oras) want to expedite the existence of the Ora cryptocoin.

Honestly if I'd guess what a lot of people want right now, it's less a finished coin and more of a general plan and timeline.
I like to believe people are generally able to wait for a long time (if needed) as long as they know what they're waiting for. If they don't, they risk getting frustrated.
It's also easier to work on promoting the project via blogs/websites when you know more details.
Example: in X months we want to try to achieve Y.

[DarkhorseofNxt]

I.  Orastarfishians (Oras) want to expedite the existence of the Ora cryptocoin.

Honestly if I'd guess what a lot of people want right now, it's less a finished coin and more of a general plan and timeline.
I like to believe people are generally able to wait for a long time (if needed) as long as they know what they're waiting for. If they don't, they risk getting frustrated.
It's also easier to work on promoting the project via blogs/websites when you know more details.
Example: in X months we want to try to achieve Y.

Exactly. I dont think we need a faster coin. But a Plan or roadmap of whats happening, current status and where are we heading to or direction.

[dongchi]

When will ORA have wallet?

[griffinriz]

When will ORA have wallet?

Its not decided yet what to clone and here you are asking about wallet 

[Mac Red]

...
As for what to use for a clone, presuming we don't write it from scratch, I'm not sold out on BTS or any other coin base to clone at this point.  But since you brought it up, what do you see that makes BTS better, or the best coin to clone?

Good question. Another angle would be this: Is there something we'd like Ora to do (technically) which can't be done using BTS as a base? What could potentially be the negative aspects of using it?

[nioccoin]

I would go for option b).

b)  Keep the IP closed for a short while, thereby protecting the IP until Ora is too far ahead for copycats to catch up to it.

Yup, that seems to me the best middle ground.

However, it is at odds with the open nature of Ora.  And it complicates the dissemination of information about what direction Ora is heading.

Hmmm.  What to do?

[megashira1]

How long would it take to develop code from scratch? Thing is if we clone a coin we're gonna get the usual "SHITCOIN CLONE SCAM" fud..

[nioccoin]

How long would it take to develop code from scratch? Thing is if we clone a coin we're gonna get the usual "SHITCOIN CLONE SCAM" fud..

My best estimate for an original codebase is at least 800 man hours.  That estimate is based on a Qora or NXT-like exchange system.  And, that estimate does not include the systems analysis or the code design.

I don't think it is worth it.  I would rather put the major effort into innovation.

Given that even Qora and NXT are routinely fudded, that won't go into any calculations of what direction we will head.  We are going down one road or another regardless of, and perhaps in spite of, fud.

kind regards,
nio

[DarkhorseofNxt]

Nxt is an ecology. I wouldnt want to and clone that. It gets too complicated and there is one thing, people will start comparing ora with this and that.

Instead i read somewhere in this thread. What do we want to solve? Probably we should look at target end users. How can we make ORA appeal to all businesses globally. What restrictions does the current coins facing?

[Este Nuno]

How long would it take to develop code from scratch? Thing is if we clone a coin we're gonna get the usual "SHITCOIN CLONE SCAM" fud..

I doubt we'll see much of that. These are cutting edge technologies that have never been cloned before. (Qora and Bitshares)

Sure there are always trolls, but no one is going to have any legit argument against ORA. It's building on brand new tech with a fair distribution and community activity.

If I wasn't currently involved with a another currency project I'd love to get fully involved. For now though I have my stake and I'm observing and supporting.

[freigeist]

Nxt is an ecology. I wouldnt want to and clone that. It gets too complicated and there is one thing, people will start comparing ora with this and that.

Instead i read somewhere in this thread. What do we want to solve? Probably we should look at target end users. How can we make ORA appeal to all businesses globally. What restrictions does the current coins facing?

restrictions of current coins:

- complicated setup and usage for end users
  for average Joe is diffcult to install sofware if is not one click install
  
- lack of simplicity for endusers in client software
  having lot of options in client can turn avay average joe becasue he won't understand them
  also majority of people use send receive operations mostly so having a client simple
  as paypal would not be a problem for averegae joe

- slow transaciton confirmations 1min to 10min
  due to this is not possbile to use any cryptocurrecy in stores without 3rd parties
  if you want mass adoption the coin needs to have from 1 to 10 sec transaction
  confirmations and should be able to repalce or in part visa or other credit cards
  
- bloted blockchains or data storage required
  due to this the coin can't scale to visa size.
 curretnly this does not seems a problem because the percentage of people in world
 that are using BTC or other cryptocurrency is small,  but immagine if 3 billions
 people will use BTC or ORA how this blockchains will increase  in size?!

- lack of anonymitiy (maybe)
  this could be problem for some users but for others not it depends what are the tradeofs
  I mean other features implemented in the coin for exemple someone does not care about anonimity
 becuse is enough for him to have cheap transaction costs.

[nioccoin]

I.  Orastarfishians (Oras) want to expedite the existence of the Ora cryptocoin.

Honestly if I'd guess what a lot of people want right now, it's less a finished coin and more of a general plan and timeline.
I like to believe people are generally able to wait for a long time (if needed) as long as they know what they're waiting for. If they don't, they risk getting frustrated.
It's also easier to work on promoting the project via blogs/websites when you know more details.
Example: in X months we want to try to achieve Y.

Exactly. I dont think we need a faster coin. But a Plan or roadmap of whats happening, current status and where are we heading to or direction.

Your wish is granted.

The project planning docs, v1.0 release, are available for download here:  https://github.com/nioccoin/ora_project/releases/tag/v1.0

Github will be the official portal for these documents, so updates will appear there as "versioned" releases.

This is a baseline release, but it does contain some hints about what direction I want to take Ora.  Remember, this is the jumping off place.  This is not "the plan" but merely "a plan".  You might look at this and want to rip it to shreds.  Great!  Let's hear your own ideas.  

What I would like to see happen is for everyone to focus most of their attention on the "risk register".  Those risk items will serve as our "opportunities" to explore and sift for potential new features.  I will also be adding a change management template soon, so we can begin formalizing stakeholder ideas that change or augment the project as we move forward.

Some of the risks in the risk register are cryptic, because they harbour some ideas that I have been mulling in terms of new Ora features, and the ideas are incomplete.  Feel free to ask questions.  I will be providing more in-depth explanations in the near future.

kind regards,
nio

[Kora]

I.  Orastarfishians (Oras) want to expedite the existence of the Ora cryptocoin.

Honestly if I'd guess what a lot of people want right now, it's less a finished coin and more of a general plan and timeline.
I like to believe people are generally able to wait for a long time (if needed) as long as they know what they're waiting for. If they don't, they risk getting frustrated.
It's also easier to work on promoting the project via blogs/websites when you know more details.
Example: in X months we want to try to achieve Y.

Exactly. I dont think we need a faster coin. But a Plan or roadmap of whats happening, current status and where are we heading to or direction.

Your wish is granted.

The project planning docs, v1.0 release, are available for download here:  https://github.com/nioccoin/ora_project/releases/tag/v1.0

Github will be the official portal for these documents, so updates will appear there as "versioned" releases.

This is a baseline release, but it does contain some hints about what direction I want to take Ora.  Remember, this is the jumping off place.  This is not "the plan" but merely "a plan".  You might look at this and want to rip it to shreds.  Great!  Let's hear your own ideas.  

What I would like to see happen is for everyone to focus most of their attention on the "risk register".  Those risk items will serve as our "opportunities" to explore and sift for potential new features.  I will also be adding a change management template soon, so we can begin formalizing stakeholder ideas that change or augment the project as we move forward.

Some of the risks in the risk register are cryptic, because they harbour some ideas that I have been mulling in terms of new Ora features, and the ideas are incomplete.  Feel free to ask questions.  I will be providing more in-depth explanations in the near future.

kind regards,
nio

Thanks nio! I encourage everyone to review nio's documents, and then share your thoughts, suggestions & opinions with the community

[Kora]

Some great discussion in this thread, very inspiring!

Whatever dev path we go down I don't think we need to feel rushed to get something out fast, just to be in 'the game'. That's what issuing the ORA asset token satisfies in the short-medium term. Day traders can have their fun (and at 427 trades to date they certainly are), and 'investors' can buy-in & sell-out as they choose, and it doesn't have to effect the dev side of ORA too much. I'm focused on the longer term, and I won't be selling any of my ORA until many years from now. I will give some away though, and buy some more for some day trading 'fun', but I'm in for the long haul!

I'd like to think that we have enough time to develop the dev 'road map'  and our 'community processes' first, and if that takes a little while to do then I don't have a problem with that. In my mind  it's 12:05am in crypto land, and the vast majority of humans are still fast asleep when it comes to decentralised blockchains & distributed financial networks. The real crypto explosion when combined market cap gets into the trillions hasn't started yet, so it's better to focus on the bigger picture now, and weigh up all our options BEFORE we begin the dev journey! It's still anyone's guess, but I think the real crypto contenders wont really start to battle it out in the mainstream until 2016, so that's still 2 years away.

Good communication that keeps people informed of our progress is critical, and I'd love for someone to step up into that roll if there's anybody keen to help with that now, but if the market consensus on our progress ebbs & flows a bit during development, and if that causes some price volatility from time-to-time, then that's a good thing IMO, as it keeps the day traders interested, and that gives us more exposure.

The long term believers in this project will either hodl, buy more, or do a bit of day trading for fun & profit, or some combinations of all those options. Hopefully the true believers will earn some bounties too!!

Now that ORA is tradeable we're not a 'boring' crypto by any means, even during development, and that's a BIG advantage compared to many other coins. We can resist the 'must get on multiple exchanges as fast as possible or we'll die' mentality. We really can! There's no rule book on how a coin 'should' be developed. The day traders can 'party' 24/7 on the NXT AE for a long time ... there's no deadline for that stage of ORA in my mind. The dev team can explore multiple options until  they are happy that ORA is finished, and they're satisfied that ORA solves the challenges we set out for it during the planning stage (i.e. NOW). If that takes longer than with most other coin projects I'm not going to let than worry me.

As for the specifics of which dev path we go down - Qora or bitshares - new innovation vs  straight clone - I'll probably be guided more by the expert opinions in our community rather than relying on my own limited technical knowledge. I am, however, a strong believer in the idea that most successful products are more of a synthesis of existing ideas with lateral thinking making a new connection, rather than being based on truly 'new' ideas & concepts. Most NEW products & services rely heavily on existing products & services for their origins, and good designers, engineers & architects are always 'extending' what already exists. Those who sit and wait for inspiration to create something 100% NEW & unique will probably wait a lifetime, unless they are a genius, which most of us aren't

Look at an iPhone for example, a great product that packaged existing 'things' together in a new way. An iPhone is basically a mash-up of 'cloned' bits & pieces from other devices.

Only a true genius can come up with an original idea, or concept, or invention that is truly 'new'. There's only been a small handful of truly innovative thinkers through history, (e.g. Newton, Einstein, Tesla), so how can we explain the massive amount of human knowledge and inventions? Most inventions are based heavily on copying existing ideas, 'cloning', lateral thinking. Most people build on the work of others, repackage existing 'things' in different ways, copy & modify etc etc

This happens in all fields of human learning and creativity. In music it's very common. One great example of this process is when Jazz musician Miles Davis combined Jazz musicians with electric instruments in the late 60's and almost single-handedly created a whole new style of music that went on to influence all musicians ever since. Jazz music previously existed, and so did electric instruments & amplification, but before Miles Davis nobody thought to put the two together. The end result is something incredibly cool, and very 'innovative', but the stroke of genius is in the 'synthesis' of two existing things, so the end result was achieved from 'copying' existing ideas & techniques, but in a new way.

The world is full of these examples. The Supermarket was born when a shop clerk waiting in line at a cafeteria 'synthesised' the functions of a 19th century 'grocery store' with a self-serving food cafeteria. Someone else thought of putting the shopping basket on wheels, and so invented the shopping trolley, but the basic idea of a Supermarket came from a new combination of two existing types of shops (cafeteria & grocery store). Lateral thinking is very powerful.

I think the sensible strategy with ORA is to work out what we want ORA to 'DO', and then we look at ALL available crypto coin platforms and synthesis existing solutions with new code where it's needed. The first task is deciding what goals we have for ORA, what problems will it solve that other coin platforms have missed. If we can't answer that question, then that would imply that a 'perfect' coin already exists, and if that were the case we should probably stop ORA asap and go and support that coin instead! ORA must solve a problem that hasn't been done yet, or solve it 'better' than an existing  option. We have to make the end user better off!!!

IMO there are a lot of really interesting coins on the market, but none of the big contenders has achieved the perfect combination of features yet, so there's plenty of scope for a newcomer like ORA to offer something "NEW", even if what we do is synthesis ideas & code & features from existing coins, and tie them all together into something unique, like electric Jazz, or a Supermarket

[fragORA]

Nice piece Kora and very impressive paper nio.

To me a few of the most important features of a new coin in the current climate are...

1. Ease of use. A lot of coins are striving for this at the moment, but nobody has really cracked it yet. We should aim for a system that is as easy to use as gmail for instance.

2. Security. Again this has to be bullet proof but easy for the end user to implement. No paper wallets or offline wallets. 2FA is probably a must.

3. Clean UI . Some coins are integrating chat and secure email etc, but I feel that these are not necessary and there are plenty of 3rd party apps that would probably do a better job

[Mac Red]

Excellent job nio, I think everyone's appreciating the level of structure you're bringing to the project.
We got a terrific start and things will only get more interesting from here.

@Kora
I fully agree we need to focus on what we'd like Ora to do. Like for example mixing functions from various coins to create something better. This way we can pinpoint the next steps more accurately. I also agree we need to trust those who are experts in their fields like nio to do their thing. We should however all voice our opinions.

[zhile11911]

the doc is so detail . thanks for nioccoin do this job.

 

[bob131313]

Great job. I think our biggest goal should be to have clear deliverables.  Meet the core goal of being a decentralized secure crypto currency and release. After the wallet is online and the chain is healthy, take the time to build up a new release with a plan to develop all the cool things.
Follow the KISS model and get something working that is strong and extensible.

Just my 2 cents.

[Kora]

I had a dev idea today that I'd like to share. The goal of PoW mining is to encourage people to run the coin P2P software to firstly secure the network, and then as a mechanism to distribute the coin supply. With PoS the coins have all been created with the genesis block, so the incentive for people to run the software comes from forging revenue.

If there was another reason that motivated people to run the coin software 24/7, then we could ensure the network was being secured, and maybe we could divert the forging transaction fees into a community pool, or donate them to charity ... or do any of a number of other things.

I'm not a dev, but on my PC there are a number of programs that I run 24/7, and if ORA incorporated the functionality of one of those programs then I'd be doing my bit to secure the network without any financial incentive required.

Is it feasible to consider combining the basic functionality of an ORA node with another piece of software that people run for its own sake? We could strip out the user GUI, and just release an ORA node software bundle that people would run 24/7 to get the functionality of the 'host' software.

Host software could be things like:
- antivirus
- torrent client
- system utilities like backup, defrag etc
- screensaver
- stock ticker desktop widget
- could even be a full linux distro, or Apache webserver software, or some other back end software that runs 24/7 with an ORA node built in

Is this too far fetched? I'm in brain storming mode, and maybe this is a ridiculous idea, but it seems much of the economics of crypto is based around motivating people to run the P2P software as much as possible. Why not attach ORA to some other software that people run anyway, then the economics of ORA can be completely different.

[curT]

What about a system that  send x ORA to every running wallet on a random time every 24h ?

[nioccoin]

Nice piece Kora and very impressive paper nio.

To me a few of the most important features of a new coin in the current climate are...

1. Ease of use. A lot of coins are striving for this at the moment, but nobody has really cracked it yet. We should aim for a system that is as easy to use as gmail for instance.

2. Security. Again this has to be bullet proof but easy for the end user to implement. No paper wallets or offline wallets. 2FA is probably a must.

3. Clean UI . Some coins are integrating chat and secure email etc, but I feel that these are not necessary and there are plenty of 3rd party apps that would probably do a better job

Thanks for your input fragORA.  Here are some things to ponder:

1.  I am a devotee of ease of use.  When considering ease of use, it all just make sense:  if something is easy to use, it will be used, and widely dispersed.  Look at picasa.  I hate it, personally for reasons that have to do with one nagging feature.  But it brought easy photo enhancement to millions of soccer moms and others who are not a traditional marketing target for the likes of Adobe photoshop (which I prefer for some tasks, and abhor for others).  Look at picasa's UI.  The top left corner has a palette of photo enhancement quick-selects that give the user live previews of the current picture in the main window, and what it looks like with each photo.  It's brilliant in its simplicity, and is handy for quick redeye fixes or twitter and facebook photo mashups.
They found a market niche and filled it.

2.    Ease of use and high security are always at cross purposes.  The division between how much to "hold the users' hands" and giving them ease and freedom is vast.  One thing we could entertain would be to focus more design attention to usability engineering.  I for one am weary of the tiresome cloned interface of most coins.  My vision for Ora's UI is much grander than that, but my vision is for Ora to have much grander features, too, so it goes hand in hand.  I'm not thinking megacoin, either.
But even then there are issues with familiarity.  Until very recently M$ was persuading windows devs to stick with the canonical menu system (file, edit, view, etc) instead of getting fancy.  The reason is familiarity.  If you do something cute, it my be the coolest app in the world but the average joe won't find it intuitive or familiar.
I'm also considering a skinnable UI, so that anyone could write a skin to appeal to lower-end users, such as a skin with large colourful buttons and simple-simon navigation.
Just like writing a novel, we need to ask the question, "who is our audience" or "who do we want to be our audience?"
M$ spent millions studying how ppl used their office suite, and in the end changed from the menu system to what I think was the office productivity equivalent of windows 8:  they made it suck starting in about ms office 2005/7 with the toolbuttons and other nonsense.  Their UE studies showed that the new system was "better".  Lots of office faithful begged to differ.  Windows 8 took away the start button because their studies showed nobody ever used it.  Windows 8 failed in part because though nobody used the start button, they used it as a polar star for navigation.

3.  My vision for a clean ui, and by clean ui I mean uncluttered with unnecessary features, is simple:  switch-selectability.  That means it can be feature rich, but the end user has complete control over what features are enabled, via a control panel.  We could also have feature templates, such as sets of features that are enabled by default.  So for someone who just wants secure chat and email, a "communications" template could be selected, and they could happily chat their heart out.  Someone who wants to trade coins could have a "traders" template that kills off all else but what is necessary to trade.  The user could have granular control over what features are used, and how cluttered their UI is.
The only downside to this type of thing is user support (in a commercial app this is nightmarish).  For instance, a vid showing install and usage would likely not match what the end user's interface looks like.  I believe support could be gotten around simply by making a usage vid for the "out of box" Ora app, with the assumption that if you are advanced enough to turn on the advanced features, you are advanced enough to know how to use the advanced features.  Of course, the wiki could have all sorts of tutorials for turning on and using each feature.

OTOH, don't mistake my intent.  I'm not inspired to throw a bunch of features at the wall to see what sticks.  I want Ora to be succinct in its features, so that it satisfies some clearly-defined needs or wants.  I don't care what we add so much as caring about whether what we add is either necessary or elegant (gives Ora a marketing edge).  Sometimes you have to add features that are common just because all the other apps have them, or more frequently, because users may respond to features that are more blingy than useful.

kind regards,
nio

[nioccoin]

Excellent job nio, I think everyone's appreciating the level of structure you're bringing to the project.
We got a terrific start and things will only get more interesting from here.

@Kora
I fully agree we need to focus on what we'd like Ora to do. Like for example mixing functions from various coins to create something better. This way we can pinpoint the next steps more accurately. I also agree we need to trust those who are experts in their fields like nio to do their thing. We should however all voice our opinions.

Yes!  Ideally we want to take the best features and practices from multiple coins, leave out their faults, add in our own features, and build Ora up.  Then we will have oragenesis, which is "orogenesis" without the "faults" 
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/orogenesis

kind regards,
nio

[nioccoin]

Great job. I think our biggest goal should be to have clear deliverables.  Meet the core goal of being a decentralized secure crypto currency and release. After the wallet is online and the chain is healthy, take the time to build up a new release with a plan to develop all the cool things.
Follow the KISS model and get something working that is strong and extensible.

Just my 2 cents.

Thanks bob...

We will have clear deliverables, and I will enforce a pretty strict system to prevent scope and feature creep.  The process is as or more important than the software, because it inspires confidence and instills trust in a coin.  Once we know what we are building, we will put a mORAtorium (I'm on a cheesy roll) on new ideas being implemented (we will of course always accept change and feature requests).  Any new ideas after that will be deferred to the next major release, unless the community decides it is too important to live without,and then I will produce a report about how it will affect the budget and/or schedule.

As for your suggestion that we take the atomic option of building a nucleus, and later adding in the electron cloud, I'm not opposed to it.  It has some advantages doing it this way (reduced time to market).  And some disadvantages, too, such as being prosaic at the start.  I think that's more a marketing decision than a programming one.

kind regards,
nio

[nioccoin]

I had a dev idea today that I'd like to share. The goal of PoW mining is to encourage people to run the coin P2P software to firstly secure the network, and then as a mechanism to distribute the coin supply. With PoS the coins have all been created with the genesis block, so the incentive for people to run the software comes from forging revenue.

If there was another reason that motivated people to run the coin software 24/7, then we could ensure the network was being secured, and maybe we could divert the forging transaction fees into a community pool, or donate them to charity ... or do any of a number of other things.

I'm not a dev, but on my PC there are a number of programs that I run 24/7, and if ORA incorporated the functionality of one of those programs then I'd be doing my bit to secure the network without any financial incentive required.

---snip-----

Is this too far fetched? I'm in brain storming mode, and maybe this is a ridiculous idea, but it seems much of the economics of crypto is based around motivating people to run the P2P software as much as possible. Why not attach ORA to some other software that people run anyway, then the economics of ORA can be completely different.

So, the problem or challenge is how to get users to run the wallet all the time and thereby help keep Ora secure?  Here are some ideas:

1.  This could be solved by defaulting the Ora daemon to start when the computer starts, by default.  The way I see it, we are responsible for making Ora secure.  More nodes means more security, so why not enforce "always on" or "on by default"?  That also solves the problems with blockchain downloading: like a torrent, it is more secure with more peers.  Just like your antivirus, you know it's always on for security, so you don't mind that it comes on all the time, every time.  I think users would understand this with Ora, too.
An alternative to this would be making two versions of an Ora wallet, one called "Ora-regular wallet" that doesn't turn on automatically.  The other could just be called "Ora Secure Wallet", and it contains the auto-on feature.  Which one would you download??

2.  If we add the right features, we will create industry in the coin such that some nodes will be on all the time to capture revenue, or use a trust system in which they are rewarded.   For instance, XC does this by "paying" some nodes to be essentially always on.  Those nodes must have a minimum of 500XC in order to act in that capacity.

kind regards,
nio

[DarkhorseofNxt]

I had a dev idea today that I'd like to share. The goal of PoW mining is to encourage people to run the coin P2P software to firstly secure the network, and then as a mechanism to distribute the coin supply. With PoS the coins have all been created with the genesis block, so the incentive for people to run the software comes from forging revenue.

If there was another reason that motivated people to run the coin software 24/7, then we could ensure the network was being secured, and maybe we could divert the forging transaction fees into a community pool, or donate them to charity ... or do any of a number of other things.

I'm not a dev, but on my PC there are a number of programs that I run 24/7, and if ORA incorporated the functionality of one of those programs then I'd be doing my bit to secure the network without any financial incentive required.

---snip-----

Is this too far fetched? I'm in brain storming mode, and maybe this is a ridiculous idea, but it seems much of the economics of crypto is based around motivating people to run the P2P software as much as possible. Why not attach ORA to some other software that people run anyway, then the economics of ORA can be completely different.

So, the problem or challenge is how to get users to run the wallet all the time and thereby help keep Ora secure?  Here are some ideas:

1.  This could be solved by defaulting the Ora daemon to start when the computer starts, by default.  The way I see it, we are responsible for making Ora secure.  More nodes means more security, so why not enforce "always on" or "on by default"?  That also solves the problems with blockchain downloading: like a torrent, it is more secure with more peers.  Just like your antivirus, you know it's always on for security, so you don't mind that it comes on all the time, every time.  I think users would understand this with Ora, too.
An alternative to this would be making two versions of an Ora wallet, one called "Ora-regular wallet" that doesn't turn on automatically.  The other could just be called "Ora Secure Wallet", and it contains the auto-on feature.  Which one would you download??

2.  If we add the right features, we will create industry in the coin such that some nodes will be on all the time to capture revenue, or use a trust system in which they are rewarded.   For instance, XC does this by "paying" some nodes to be essentially always on.  Those nodes must have a minimum of 500XC in order to act in that capacity.

kind regards,
nio

More nodes keeps the chain healthy and secure. But how do you reward these nodes? Must be attractive and practical.

Also nioc, just thinking, is it possible to have a platform and features that act like plugins. Like the iphone / android ui feature. So most of the features can be added like an app. And that also may bring in more devs to work or bring in some new features. Ora wallet becomes like a smart platform. What do you think about this?

This is the idea. Maybe the exchanges can do an "app" and integrate with the wallet directly or any other feature.

[Kora]

Nice piece Kora and very impressive paper nio.

To me a few of the most important features of a new coin in the current climate are...

1. Ease of use. A lot of coins are striving for this at the moment, but nobody has really cracked it yet. We should aim for a system that is as easy to use as gmail for instance.

2. Security. Again this has to be bullet proof but easy for the end user to implement. No paper wallets or offline wallets. 2FA is probably a must.

3. Clean UI . Some coins are integrating chat and secure email etc, but I feel that these are not necessary and there are plenty of 3rd party apps that would probably do a better job

Thanks for your input fragORA.  Here are some things to ponder:

1.  I am a devotee of ease of use.  When considering ease of use, it all just make sense:  if something is easy to use, it will be used, and widely dispersed.  Look at picasa.  I hate it, personally for reasons that have to do with one nagging feature.  But it brought easy photo enhancement to millions of soccer moms and others who are not a traditional marketing target for the likes of Adobe photoshop (which I prefer for some tasks, and abhor for others).  Look at picasa's UI.  The top left corner has a palette of photo enhancement quick-selects that give the user live previews of the current picture in the main window, and what it looks like with each photo.  It's brilliant in its simplicity, and is handy for quick redeye fixes or twitter and facebook photo mashups.
They found a market niche and filled it.

2.    Ease of use and high security are always at cross purposes.  The division between how much to "hold the users' hands" and giving them ease and freedom is vast.  One thing we could entertain would be to focus more design attention to usability engineering.  I for one am weary of the tiresome cloned interface of most coins.  My vision for Ora's UI is much grander than that, but my vision is for Ora to have much grander features, too, so it goes hand in hand.  I'm not thinking megacoin, either.
But even then there are issues with familiarity.  Until very recently M$ was persuading windows devs to stick with the canonical menu system (file, edit, view, etc) instead of getting fancy.  The reason is familiarity.  If you do something cute, it my be the coolest app in the world but the average joe won't find it intuitive or familiar.
I'm also considering a skinnable UI, so that anyone could write a skin to appeal to lower-end users, such as a skin with large colourful buttons and simple-simon navigation.
Just like writing a novel, we need to ask the question, "who is our audience" or "who do we want to be our audience?"
M$ spent millions studying how ppl used their office suite, and in the end changed from the menu system to what I think was the office productivity equivalent of windows 8:  they made it suck starting in about ms office 2005/7 with the toolbuttons and other nonsense.  Their UE studies showed that the new system was "better".  Lots of office faithful begged to differ.  Windows 8 took away the start button because their studies showed nobody ever used it.  Windows 8 failed in part because though nobody used the start button, they used it as a polar star for navigation.

3.  My vision for a clean ui, and by clean ui I mean uncluttered with unnecessary features, is simple:  switch-selectability.  That means it can be feature rich, but the end user has complete control over what features are enabled, via a control panel.  We could also have feature templates, such as sets of features that are enabled by default.  So for someone who just wants secure chat and email, a "communications" template could be selected, and they could happily chat their heart out.  Someone who wants to trade coins could have a "traders" template that kills off all else but what is necessary to trade.  The user could have granular control over what features are used, and how cluttered their UI is.
The only downside to this type of thing is user support (in a commercial app this is nightmarish).  For instance, a vid showing install and usage would likely not match what the end user's interface looks like.  I believe support could be gotten around simply by making a usage vid for the "out of box" Ora app, with the assumption that if you are advanced enough to turn on the advanced features, you are advanced enough to know how to use the advanced features.  Of course, the wiki could have all sorts of tutorials for turning on and using each feature.

OTOH, don't mistake my intent.  I'm not inspired to throw a bunch of features at the wall to see what sticks.  I want Ora to be succinct in its features, so that it satisfies some clearly-defined needs or wants.  I don't care what we add so much as caring about whether what we add is either necessary or elegant (gives Ora a marketing edge).  Sometimes you have to add features that are common just because all the other apps have them, or more frequently, because users may respond to features that are more blingy than useful.

kind regards,
nio

Great post nio!

I agree 100% on your focus on ease of use. I think that's been the key to Google & Apple success, especially Google. In my job I regularly have to instruct novice users on how to navigate around the internet, and while for most tech oriented people the Google phenomenon might seem to depend on their page rank and adsense algorithms, and the effectiveness of their technology, for the vast majority of average users the power of Google comes from two key areas not related to the tech under-the-hood.

1 - super clean & simple design
2 - Google 'charm', 'character' & 'personality' from the Google logo, and their many 'tribute' versions

Google crushed all its rivals in search because compared to the competition like Yahoo, Excite & Altavista, Google search was ultra 'friendly', and ultra obvious.

The Google search page is a design masterpiece IMO, and compared to all the cluttered overly busy home pages of late 90's search rivals, Google was, and still is, an oasis of user friendliness. You can literally show the Google search screen to anyone from a 3 year old to someone in their 80's, and nearly everyone will instantly know what to do (type in the box), and almost as important, the Google logo makes most people 'feel' something positive - fun, relaxed, quirky, playful, happy - so it helps put a freaked out computer newbie more at ease, so they're much more open to the idea that they can use the tool effectively. The Google logo is a bit like a warm up joke for a serious public speaker, it puts novice users in a good frame of mind to 'engage' with what's on offer. Show a novice user Yahoo, and it's a totally different matter, they baulk and feel intimidated.

Simplicity with a bit of 'personality' is a great design goal, especially for the millions of people who will use ORA who know nothing about  crypto, blockchains, P2P, etc

[nioccoin]

I had a dev idea today that I'd like to share. The goal of PoW mining is to encourage people to run the coin P2P software to firstly secure the network, and then as a mechanism to distribute the coin supply. With PoS the coins have all been created with the genesis block, so the incentive for people to run the software comes from forging revenue.

If there was another reason that motivated people to run the coin software 24/7, then we could ensure the network was being secured, and maybe we could divert the forging transaction fees into a community pool, or donate them to charity ... or do any of a number of other things.

I'm not a dev, but on my PC there are a number of programs that I run 24/7, and if ORA incorporated the functionality of one of those programs then I'd be doing my bit to secure the network without any financial incentive required.

---snip-----

Is this too far fetched? I'm in brain storming mode, and maybe this is a ridiculous idea, but it seems much of the economics of crypto is based around motivating people to run the P2P software as much as possible. Why not attach ORA to some other software that people run anyway, then the economics of ORA can be completely different.

So, the problem or challenge is how to get users to run the wallet all the time and thereby help keep Ora secure?  Here are some ideas:

1.  This could be solved by defaulting the Ora daemon to start when the computer starts, by default.  The way I see it, we are responsible for making Ora secure.  More nodes means more security, so why not enforce "always on" or "on by default"?  That also solves the problems with blockchain downloading: like a torrent, it is more secure with more peers.  Just like your antivirus, you know it's always on for security, so you don't mind that it comes on all the time, every time.  I think users would understand this with Ora, too.
An alternative to this would be making two versions of an Ora wallet, one called "Ora-regular wallet" that doesn't turn on automatically.  The other could just be called "Ora Secure Wallet", and it contains the auto-on feature.  Which one would you download??

2.  If we add the right features, we will create industry in the coin such that some nodes will be on all the time to capture revenue, or use a trust system in which they are rewarded.   For instance, XC does this by "paying" some nodes to be essentially always on.  Those nodes must have a minimum of 500XC in order to act in that capacity.

kind regards,
nio

Also nioc, just thinking, is it possible to have a platform and features that act like plugins. Like the iphone / android ui feature. So most of the features can be added like an app. And that also may bring in more devs to work or bring in some new features. Ora wallet becomes like a smart platform. What do you think about this?

This is the idea. Maybe the exchanges can do an "app" and integrate with the wallet directly or any other feature.

You are reading my mind on plugins.  The beauty of this approach is we create a core wallet with an API, and anyone can build a plugin, for fun or profit.  If someone creates a killer plugin and others think it's worth a fistful of money, then it can even be sold; or traded for work on a project; or donated.

This adds a financial incentive for others to add value to Ora.  For mainstream features that are more mission critical or should be included in the base product, we could offer a power bounty for a new feature (it will be forbidden to be sold), and release the kracken.

The downside is this adds complexity to the product, making it much more difficult to design, build, and maintain.  I would have to figure out how to deal with the intricacies of this model, especially in terms of security, but also in terms of bloating the blockchain and enforcing a usability standard on all plugins.

kind regards,
nio

[DarkhorseofNxt]

Probably we can accomplish it step by step. First a wallet that is running with nodes. Stabilise that can do some basic transaction. Then ora 2.0 comes with all the fancy plugin ideas.

Edit : also please consider adding multisig for public accounts.

[ObscureBean]

I had a dev idea today that I'd like to share. The goal of PoW mining is to encourage people to run the coin P2P software to firstly secure the network, and then as a mechanism to distribute the coin supply. With PoS the coins have all been created with the genesis block, so the incentive for people to run the software comes from forging revenue.

If there was another reason that motivated people to run the coin software 24/7, then we could ensure the network was being secured, and maybe we could divert the forging transaction fees into a community pool, or donate them to charity ... or do any of a number of other things.

I'm not a dev, but on my PC there are a number of programs that I run 24/7, and if ORA incorporated the functionality of one of those programs then I'd be doing my bit to secure the network without any financial incentive required.

---snip-----

Is this too far fetched? I'm in brain storming mode, and maybe this is a ridiculous idea, but it seems much of the economics of crypto is based around motivating people to run the P2P software as much as possible. Why not attach ORA to some other software that people run anyway, then the economics of ORA can be completely different.

So, the problem or challenge is how to get users to run the wallet all the time and thereby help keep Ora secure?  Here are some ideas:

1.  This could be solved by defaulting the Ora daemon to start when the computer starts, by default.  The way I see it, we are responsible for making Ora secure.  More nodes means more security, so why not enforce "always on" or "on by default"?  That also solves the problems with blockchain downloading: like a torrent, it is more secure with more peers.  Just like your antivirus, you know it's always on for security, so you don't mind that it comes on all the time, every time.  I think users would understand this with Ora, too.
An alternative to this would be making two versions of an Ora wallet, one called "Ora-regular wallet" that doesn't turn on automatically.  The other could just be called "Ora Secure Wallet", and it contains the auto-on feature.  Which one would you download??

2.  If we add the right features, we will create industry in the coin such that some nodes will be on all the time to capture revenue, or use a trust system in which they are rewarded.   For instance, XC does this by "paying" some nodes to be essentially always on.  Those nodes must have a minimum of 500XC in order to act in that capacity.

kind regards,
nio

Also nioc, just thinking, is it possible to have a platform and features that act like plugins. Like the iphone / android ui feature. So most of the features can be added like an app. And that also may bring in more devs to work or bring in some new features. Ora wallet becomes like a smart platform. What do you think about this?

This is the idea. Maybe the exchanges can do an "app" and integrate with the wallet directly or any other feature.

You are reading my mind on plugins.  The beauty of this approach is we create a core wallet with an API, and anyone can build a plugin, for fun or profit.  If someone creates a killer plugin and others think it's worth a fistful of money, then it can even be sold; or traded for work on a project; or donated.

This adds a financial incentive for others to add value to Ora.  For mainstream features that are more mission critical or should be included in the base product, we could offer a power bounty for a new feature (it will be forbidden to be sold), and release the kracken.

The downside is this adds complexity to the product, making it much more difficult to design, build, and maintain.  I would have to figure out how to deal with the intricacies of this model, especially in terms of security, but also in terms of bloating the blockchain and enforcing a usability standard on all plugins.

kind regards,
nio

Wow that's an amazing idea, a wallet with an API would be out of this world  The possibilities are endless.
My main concern is security, the plugins would have to be thoroughly checked before they're released. But if you can pull this off, I think it'll be a massive step for cryptos in general.

[nioccoin]

Probably we can accomplish it step by step. First a wallet that is running with nodes. Stabilise that can do some basic transaction. Then ora 2.0 comes with all the fancy plugin ideas.

Edit : also please consider adding multisig for public accounts.

I will very likely implement multisig, or some similar solution.  It falls under our previously-discussed MFA scheme, specifically under the "something you have" category.


Anyone hungry for a can of worms?  Here is one I wrote earlier in 2014.  It is an excerpt from one of my unpublished white papers.  This explains why I am not fond of the whole multisig (escrow) solution for commerce, though it is still valid for theft prevention.

I have reread this dozens of times, hoping for a lightbulb to come on, in an attempt to solve this issue in a decentralized manner.  (Proof of Trust is an elephant name for the as yet-to-be-determined solution to this puzzle):


(the markup in this is because it was written in TeX)

\section{Talk more about proof of trust}

Proof of Trust is not a new innovation, but a ubiquitous one.  The inspiration comes from human observation.  We are social creatures, and with that social imperative comes the issue of trust.  We all come from parents who may or may not have been trustworthy.  We all have had friends, spouses, and family, some of whom have betrayed the trust vested in them.  Officials betray trust all the time.  What is needed is not to cast trust out, but to embrace proof of trust, and then still prepare for its unwinding.  Proof of trust, like an SSL cert or trusted algorithm can sometimes be found wanting.  When you read Satoshi's seminal work - he discusses the problem of trust in regards to financial transactions.  But his solution is inadequate because it is one-sided.  His Bitcoin system is designed for trusted transactions, but in his Introduction he writes "Transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers."

Wait, this sounds as if Bitcoin does not use cryptography to eliminate trust!  Exactly.  It is one hand clapping.  It solves only the merchant's trust problem.  The buyer must \textit{hire} a trusted partner to escrow the transaction or otherwise certify the goods are as described.  What is an escrow system but a third party that provides the trust component?  Would anyone trust an escrow whose main office is a travelling carnival?  So even Bitcoin does not eliminate trust.  And that is not what it is trying to do, but it is not accurate to say that Bitcoin fixes the trust issue.  What Bitcoin does is fix the \textit{seller's} risk in the protocol, and the buyer's commodities are of unknown risk, pending a second financial transaction procured by the buyer to the escrow system!!!  Alibaba at long last has an escrow system that works seemingly well, and it places the onus on the seller to deliver the goods prior to the escrow releasing the money.  But it increases the cost of doing business for the buyer and the seller.  The seller will raise his price to accommodate the new basis in cost to his business.  One way or the other, the buyer will end up paying the difference.

Further, it is clear from this that the trust part of the equation is necessarily centralized, if not by one company by a dozen, but still far less than the decentralized peers that secure the blockchain.  Supposing there exists one escrow service that sifts Bitcoins and goods, attempting to satisfy both sides of the transaction.  That entity will necessarily need to sit at the crossroads of the physical and digital boundaries, unless the goods being purchased are themselves digital.  Therefore, that escrow entity must be physically centralized, and how will they be trusted?  Won't they have to post a bond of some sort to certify their business as legitimate, and purchase insurance on the goods they hold?  Won't they need to satisfy not only the financial authorities as well as the commodity authorities?  It seems that an escrow service is not nearly as trivial as was envisioned.  The Alibaba system is a good example, but notice they provided it to satisfy the buyer for a very good reason.  Fraud from the seller side was rampant, causing the reduction of trade.  The frauds were hurting the legitimate buyers and sellers.  The escrow service put the onus of trust on the sell side, because the fraud wasn't bad money per se, but bad or grossly misdescribed or fraudulent goods.  What if the money is fraudulent?  In Bitcoin, it doesn't matter. If the Bitcoin is stolen, it is spendable without recourse.

But if the money is held in abeyance, that completely defeats the elegance of the fast payments upon which Bitcoin is based.  The point is that one of the best parts of Bitcoin is in reality not feasible, and not usable, because it defeats itself in practice.  As has been discussed, where Bitcoin is most interesting (purchasing goods), it is least useful, and where it is most useful (transferring money), it is prosaic, offering little benefit to the user and, as of recently, incurring a capital gains tax that makes the baseline expense of using it at least 15\% more expensive than cash.

Even if it was trivial, being at the crossroads of the physical and digital worlds requires real expenses, for facilities, for employees, and the like.  Therefore, it would seem that the purchaser will pay additional fees, probably in excess of what the transaction would have cost using a credit card or cash at the local brick and mortar warehouses.

In sum, trust cannot be decentralized when it must cross the physical boundary.

This was written some time ago, and some of my opinions have changed, so consider this nioccoin version 1.0.  But I still am haunted by the problem of having to centralize trust.  That hasn't worked out too well for the payment card industry, and even SSL companies have been robbed blind, causing heartache, or heartbleed, as the case may be 

As long as we are dealing in physical goods, I don't think we can solve this problem "online".

Here's my vision for "the" winning currency:  In-person transactions using digital anonymous payment, where the buyer can inspect the physical goods, and the seller can confirm the payment on the spot.  No escrow needed.  No credit card with your name on it, and being asked for your photo id.  95% of all commerce still takes place locally anyway.  Digital cash needs to behave almost exactly like real cash for the buyer, and be verifiable instantly by the seller, no less than if you pay the seller with a crisp new hundred-pound note and he has to use a special pen to mark it to check for counterfeit.



kind regards,
nio

[Mac Red]

A new place to discuss Ora is up!
http://www.oraforum.org/

This of course doesn't mean we'll stop any discussion here; it's just an extra place to help gather and build the community.

// Mac

[bernard75]

A new place to discuss Ora is up!
http://www.oraforum.org/

This of course doesn't mean we'll stop any discussion here; it's just an extra place to help gather and build the community.

// Mac

I hope we will continue here, not really a big fan of looking in different places for the same info.

[Mac Red]

A new place to discuss Ora is up!
http://www.oraforum.org/

This of course doesn't mean we'll stop any discussion here; it's just an extra place to help gather and build the community.

// Mac

I hope we will continue here, not really a big fan of looking in different places for the same info.

Well one of the best things about having our own forum is being able to find info quicker and easier. We'd have needed one sooner or later anyway to stay organized.
How useful it'll be in the near future is up to everyone.

[Kora]

Probably we can accomplish it step by step. First a wallet that is running with nodes. Stabilise that can do some basic transaction. Then ora 2.0 comes with all the fancy plugin ideas.

Edit : also please consider adding multisig for public accounts.

I will very likely implement multisig, or some similar solution.  It falls under our previously-discussed MFA scheme, specifically under the "something you have" category.


Anyone hungry for a can of worms?  Here is one I wrote earlier in 2014.  It is an excerpt from one of my unpublished white papers.  This explains why I am not fond of the whole multisig (escrow) solution for commerce, though it is still valid for theft prevention.

I have reread this dozens of times, hoping for a lightbulb to come on, in an attempt to solve this issue in a decentralized manner.  (Proof of Trust is an elephant name for the as yet-to-be-determined solution to this puzzle):


(the markup in this is because it was written in TeX)

\section{Talk more about proof of trust}

Proof of Trust is not a new innovation, but a ubiquitous one.  The inspiration comes from human observation.  We are social creatures, and with that social imperative comes the issue of trust.  We all come from parents who may or may not have been trustworthy.  We all have had friends, spouses, and family, some of whom have betrayed the trust vested in them.  Officials betray trust all the time.  What is needed is not to cast trust out, but to embrace proof of trust, and then still prepare for its unwinding.  Proof of trust, like an SSL cert or trusted algorithm can sometimes be found wanting.  When you read Satoshi's seminal work - he discusses the problem of trust in regards to financial transactions.  But his solution is inadequate because it is one-sided.  His Bitcoin system is designed for trusted transactions, but in his Introduction he writes "Transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers."

Wait, this sounds as if Bitcoin does not use cryptography to eliminate trust!  Exactly.  It is one hand clapping.  It solves only the merchant's trust problem.  The buyer must \textit{hire} a trusted partner to escrow the transaction or otherwise certify the goods are as described.  What is an escrow system but a third party that provides the trust component?  Would anyone trust an escrow whose main office is a travelling carnival?  So even Bitcoin does not eliminate trust.  And that is not what it is trying to do, but it is not accurate to say that Bitcoin fixes the trust issue.  What Bitcoin does is fix the \textit{seller's} risk in the protocol, and the buyer's commodities are of unknown risk, pending a second financial transaction procured by the buyer to the escrow system!!!  Alibaba at long last has an escrow system that works seemingly well, and it places the onus on the seller to deliver the goods prior to the escrow releasing the money.  But it increases the cost of doing business for the buyer and the seller.  The seller will raise his price to accommodate the new basis in cost to his business.  One way or the other, the buyer will end up paying the difference.

Further, it is clear from this that the trust part of the equation is necessarily centralized, if not by one company by a dozen, but still far less than the decentralized peers that secure the blockchain.  Supposing there exists one escrow service that sifts Bitcoins and goods, attempting to satisfy both sides of the transaction.  That entity will necessarily need to sit at the crossroads of the physical and digital boundaries, unless the goods being purchased are themselves digital.  Therefore, that escrow entity must be physically centralized, and how will they be trusted?  Won't they have to post a bond of some sort to certify their business as legitimate, and purchase insurance on the goods they hold?  Won't they need to satisfy not only the financial authorities as well as the commodity authorities?  It seems that an escrow service is not nearly as trivial as was envisioned.  The Alibaba system is a good example, but notice they provided it to satisfy the buyer for a very good reason.  Fraud from the seller side was rampant, causing the reduction of trade.  The frauds were hurting the legitimate buyers and sellers.  The escrow service put the onus of trust on the sell side, because the fraud wasn't bad money per se, but bad or grossly misdescribed or fraudulent goods.  What if the money is fraudulent?  In Bitcoin, it doesn't matter. If the Bitcoin is stolen, it is spendable without recourse.

But if the money is held in abeyance, that completely defeats the elegance of the fast payments upon which Bitcoin is based.  The point is that one of the best parts of Bitcoin is in reality not feasible, and not usable, because it defeats itself in practice.  As has been discussed, where Bitcoin is most interesting (purchasing goods), it is least useful, and where it is most useful (transferring money), it is prosaic, offering little benefit to the user and, as of recently, incurring a capital gains tax that makes the baseline expense of using it at least 15\% more expensive than cash.

Even if it was trivial, being at the crossroads of the physical and digital worlds requires real expenses, for facilities, for employees, and the like.  Therefore, it would seem that the purchaser will pay additional fees, probably in excess of what the transaction would have cost using a credit card or cash at the local brick and mortar warehouses.

In sum, trust cannot be decentralized when it must cross the physical boundary.

This was written some time ago, and some of my opinions have changed, so consider this nioccoin version 1.0.  But I still am haunted by the problem of having to centralize trust.  That hasn't worked out too well for the payment card industry, and even SSL companies have been robbed blind, causing heartache, or heartbleed, as the case may be 

As long as we are dealing in physical goods, I don't think we can solve this problem "online".

Here's my vision for "the" winning currency:  In-person transactions using digital anonymous payment, where the buyer can inspect the physical goods, and the seller can confirm the payment on the spot.  No escrow needed.  No credit card with your name on it, and being asked for your photo id.  95% of all commerce still takes place locally anyway.  Digital cash needs to behave almost exactly like real cash for the buyer, and be verifiable instantly by the seller, no less than if you pay the seller with a crisp new hundred-pound note and he has to use a special pen to mark it to check for counterfeit.



kind regards,
nio

Very interesting topic nio! I agree that decentralised 'proof-of-trust' might be impossible to guarantee, but I think decentralised 'probability-of-trust' is very attainable using reputation systems, especially if the reputation is itself attached to something valuable, like a 'reputation' coin.

I think Bitmark is trying something interesting with their 'Marking' proposal - https://github.com/project-bitmark/marking/wiki

Maybe an acceptable situation for both sellers & buyers of physical goods can be found using a reputation system where the costs associated with breaking a previously earnt good reputation is made prohibitively high, compared to the potential gain from defaulting on an agreed sale or exchange. We all know that a scammer can reboot a new identity on a market like ebay any time they choose, but they can't take any 'good reputation' with them into the next 'life'. If that good reputation was actually exchangeable into another asset, then an honest buyer/seller could literally bank their good reputation from time to time, and a dishonest act would literally cost the offender real value.

Of course honest people can fall on hard times and get tempted to act dishonestly if they're in desperate circumstances, and genuine scammers can 'imitate' an honest trader to 'set up' for a big scam later on (like zipllibrary who did the shareXchange scam), but if the loss in monetary reputation was close in value to the size of a particular trade then the other party could say with a higher 'probability' that the likelihood of getting scammed was a lot smaller than if the other party had just cashed in some of their 'reputation coins'.

I think loss of reputation capital *could* be used as an effective disincentive against rogue behaviour, and it could be monetized using a crypto currency

Can we have a reputation coin built into ORA somehow?

[nioccoin]

...snip...
Can we have a reputation coin built into ORA somehow?

I'm glad you asked! Yes, reputation is something I want to incorporate into Ora.  I have some ideas to break new ground in this arena.  But as always, I'm accepting ideas from the community on this (and everything else).

kind regards,
nio

[Mac Red]

4000 bonus Ora for original stakeholders (founded by me):
http://oraforum.org/index.php?topic=17.0

Let us know what you'd most like to see happen in the project.

[Mac Red]

Feel free to join us on the forum nio.

[nioccoin]

It's official!

The Ora team has decided to reject cloning Qora as a candidate solution for Ora.  As we have delved deeper into what kind of currency Ora will be, and gathered requirements from the project stakeholders (including everyone active in the forums), the direction we want to take Ora will be better served by eliminating Qora from the candidate solutions pool.  Instead Ora will strike out in a different direction.  This should be no surprise to many of you who have followed Ora since the beginning.  The project documents for Ora were created in anticipation of this contingency.  In fact, it has been our intent to remain loosely coupled to what coin, if any, we would ultimately clone. 

This decision opens up a multitude of new possibilities for Ora, but the greatest relief is it unshackles Ora from waiting on some other coin's months-long open source release, and the subsequent waiting period during which the open-sourced code is vetted, a process which by itself may take months of distribution to reveal errors and weaknesses.

Because we have anticipated this risk from the beginning, and even codified this into our founding documents, we have lost no momentum whatsoever.

Stay tuned for more information in the next few weeks as we continue updating our investigation into Ora's business requirements.

kind regards,
nio

[Sebastien256]

What about Ora being the first currency on top of NXt using the Nxt monetary system? Just an idea.

[rabbiter]

It's official!

The Ora team has decided to reject cloning Qora as a candidate solution for Ora.  As we have delved deeper into what kind of currency Ora will be, and gathered requirements from the project stakeholders (including everyone active in the forums), the direction we want to take Ora will be better served by eliminating Qora from the candidate solutions pool.  Instead Ora will strike out in a different direction.  This should be no surprise to many of you who have followed Ora since the beginning.  The project documents for Ora were created in anticipation of this contingency.  In fact, it has been our intent to remain loosely coupled to what coin, if any, we would ultimately clone.  

This decision opens up a multitude of new possibilities for Ora, but the greatest relief is it unshackles Ora from waiting on some other coin's months-long open source release, and the subsequent waiting period during which the open-sourced code is vetted, a process which by itself may take months of distribution to reveal errors and weaknesses.

Because we have anticipated this risk from the beginning, and even codified this into our founding documents, we have lost no momentum whatsoever.

Stay tuned for more information in the next few weeks as we continue updating our investigation into Ora's business requirements.

kind regards,
nio

It's official you are a joke. And for goodness sake why don't supporters here buy actual Qora and come on board. There is no unfair distribution now the price has been knocked down so much. You simply can't use that argument anymore than the ROI early miners get. Hop on the Qora train the price is about to explode.

[DarkhorseofNxt]

This is not a joke. This is a practical solution. Instead of waiting for Qora's source code, ORA is now moving in a practical direction. This shouldn't come as a shocker to you. Told ya before chance of Ora using Qora is 50% chance.

[rabbiter]

This is not a joke. This is a practical solution. Instead of waiting for Qora's source code, ORA is now moving in a practical direction. This shouldn't come as a shocker to you. Told ya before chance of Ora using Qora is 50% chance.

so what do you have now? A desire to get rich? Joke.

[DarkhorseofNxt]

This is not a joke. This is a practical solution. Instead of waiting for Qora's source code, ORA is now moving in a practical direction. This shouldn't come as a shocker to you. Told ya before chance of Ora using Qora is 50% chance.

so what do you have now? A desire to get rich? Joke.

A plan towards a real time business platform. So yeah, not a joke. Do you see pumps anywhere? We are not concerned with the price. 

[Mac Red]

Thanks for the update nio. Things will get very interesting from here!

[Kora]

This is not a joke. This is a practical solution. Instead of waiting for Qora's source code, ORA is now moving in a practical direction. This shouldn't come as a shocker to you. Told ya before chance of Ora using Qora is 50% chance.

so what do you have now? A desire to get rich? Joke.

Why do you say a group of people coming together to discuss 'building' something 'useful' is a joke? Some of the parts of ORA might be borrowed & modified from other projects, some might be developed from scratch. Where's the joke? It's the same basic process that humans have been employing for thousands of years. Building on top of and extending what already exists to try and make new things that didn't exist previously, and/or making existing things better.

That's what open source software is about. That's why people share their knowledge in academic journals & books all around the world. It's about experimenting, making progress, learning from mistakes, and not being afraid of falling down occasionally, or being criticized.

Why not join us?

Read this recent post from the Skycoin dev - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=380441.msg8505148#msg8505148 - he/she understands. Feel their passion for what they're trying to do.

See the crypto glass as half full!

[nioccoin]

It's official you are a joke. And for goodness sake why don't supporters here buy actual Qora and come on board. There is no unfair distribution now the price has been knocked down so much. You simply can't use that argument anymore than the ROI early miners get. Hop on the Qora train the price is about to explode.

rabbiter = upset when Ora decided to clone Qora.
rabbiter = upset when Ora decided not to clone Qora.

Rage!

[Este Nuno]

It's official you are a joke. And for goodness sake why don't supporters here buy actual Qora and come on board. There is no unfair distribution now the price has been knocked down so much. You simply can't use that argument anymore than the ROI early miners get. Hop on the Qora train the price is about to explode.

A community can make or break a coin and we can begin to see here why Qora is sitting at 13 satoshi despite being a new and innovative technology.

Perhaps you will learn a lesson from Ora here.

[BestofSR]

Not cloning Qora is good decision.

Rabbiter has terrible marketing strategy for Qora, by forcing others to buy your coin makes it repulsive. One reason I havent invested in Qora is Rabbiters posts all over this forum.

[sparta_cuss]

...snip...
Can we have a reputation coin built into ORA somehow?

I'm glad you asked! Yes, reputation is something I want to incorporate into Ora.  I have some ideas to break new ground in this arena.  But as always, I'm accepting ideas from the community on this (and everything else).

kind regards,
nio

Please take a look at this thread from the Counterparty forum.

https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,220.0.html

This is a very interesting proposal to monetize the reputation of any particular seller by making it possible to issue an insurance policy on that seller. I don't know whether this could be built into a coin at the core.

This proposal went in a number of productive directions, but ultimately the one driver of the discussion lost interest. I am sharing it here because it's too interesting an idea to leave alone. I do not have the technical knowledge to be able to code such a thing, but am quite capable of creating use cases and imagining how this might work from a user's perspective.

If you decide to go in this direction, I would love to contribute.

[Kora]

...snip...
Can we have a reputation coin built into ORA somehow?

I'm glad you asked! Yes, reputation is something I want to incorporate into Ora.  I have some ideas to break new ground in this arena.  But as always, I'm accepting ideas from the community on this (and everything else).

kind regards,
nio

Please take a look at this thread from the Counterparty forum.

https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,220.0.html

This is a very interesting proposal to monetize the reputation of any particular seller by making it possible to issue an insurance policy on that seller. I don't know whether this could be built into a coin at the core.

This proposal went in a number of productive directions, but ultimately the one driver of the discussion lost interest. I am sharing it here because it's too interesting an idea to leave alone. I do not have the technical knowledge to be able to code such a thing, but am quite capable of creating use cases and imagining how this might work from a user's perspective.

If you decide to go in this direction, I would love to contribute.

Hey, thanks sparta_cuss!
I agree that moneitizing reputation effectively to both prevent scams, and to facilitate more effective online commerce is one of the 'holy grails' at the moment. The great thing with online life is you can still be anon if you want, but that shouldn't stop you accumulating a 'good' reputation that transports easily from one environment to another. A coin that builds a reputation system into its ecosystem, and somehow uses that to prevent scams, compensate victims, and reward good honest behaviour is something I'm very interested in pursuing, so I'll definitely check that proposal out some more.

Here's a really good TED talk on reputation capital that I found very thought provoking  - https://www.ted.com/talks/rachel_botsman_the_currency_of_the_new_economy_is_trust

thanks

[Pentamon]

Final voting week for the logo!

Please go here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=697958.msg8688537#msg8688537

Pentamon

[Victorius]

any interesting news regarding development? Do we know what we are gonna to clone?

[nioccoin]

any interesting news regarding development? Do we know what we are gonna to clone?

I've been doing a great deal of research on potential new features.  We have had some internal discussions regarding a clone source.  I will be compiling these into the next version of the Ora project plan, which will be due out after I have the website completed.

If you have any ideas regarding a clone base or features, feel free to speak up about them.

kind regards,
nio

[freigeist]

any interesting news regarding development? Do we know what we are gonna to clone?

I've been doing a great deal of research on potential new features.  We have had some internal discussions regarding a clone source.  I will be compiling these into the next version of the Ora project plan, which will be due out after I have the website completed.

If you have any ideas regarding a clone base or features, feel free to speak up about them.

kind regards,
nio

Hello.

Recently I have heard of a coin that has an interesting concept but i found the implementation
or lets say distribution to much centralized.
Maybe ORA could implement the same concepts but with a wider user base adoption.

You can find the links here and also my thought about it:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225659.msg8968204#msg8968204

[kora2]

any interesting news regarding development? Do we know what we are gonna to clone?

I've been doing a great deal of research on potential new features.  We have had some internal discussions regarding a clone source.  I will be compiling these into the next version of the Ora project plan, which will be due out after I have the website completed.

If you have any ideas regarding a clone base or features, feel free to speak up about them.

kind regards,
nio

Hello.

Recently I have heard of a coin that has an interesting concept but i found the implementation
or lets say distribution to much centralized.
Maybe ORA could implement the same concepts but with a wider user base adoption.

You can find the links here and also my thought about it:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=225659.msg8968204#msg8968204

Thank you for this suggestion! It does look interesting.

[Kora]

I'm going to lock this thread now.