Fri 28 Aug 2015 11:05PM

Sensorica Next Generation Infrastructure

LF Lynn Foster Public Seen by 228

Sensorica is working on fundraising for OVN infrastructure. There has been much discussion in the Sensorica email list on this. This Loomio discussion is to have a more structured conversation on what the fundraising is for, and what is the agreed upon structure for any project resulting from the fundraising.

NOTE: This discussion is NOT about the fundraising itself, that is happening elsewhere.

General proposal on the table for the possible infrastructure project, for discussion:
* The project team will include all the people who have been working on the infrastructure in any significant way, if they want to join.
* The team (new and old people) will all agree they can work with each other productively before final formation of the team.
* The team will only include people who have proven commitment to the OVN or other next-economy forms, not in it just for the money.
* The team will manage itself. The team will set up its own process methodology and its own value equation.
* The team will make technical and architectural decisions for the good of the project, with input from supportive people who have relevant technical knowledge.
* The role of the R&D and outreach people at Sensorica will be as valued collaborators, and focus on Sensorica requirements and preferences, feedback, and testing.

The other part of the discussion is what possible paths to take, and there have been some thoughts put forward on that. Many of these are not mutually exclusive, so could be worked on in parallel, more a matter of how any funding would be divided up between the finally chosen options.

Some possibilities that have been mentioned already, and I'm sure people can put more forward:
* Strengthen and clean up the existing model layer (where the logic lives), and create an API for that.
* A complete new UI, or multiple new UIs, to include web and mobile interfaces. Or partial new pieces of UI, and keep some of the existing mundane parts. New UI relates to the previous one, because a new model API and new UI would work together.
* Start completely over, build from scratch. (This one is mutually exclusive I guess, except the requirements developed in the NRP could be used as a starting point. Or not.)
* Rethink the base technology. This includes for example using blockchain. Might be other things people are thinking of in this arena. (Note using Ethereum or similar would be at a different layer than the NRP logic itself.)
* Rethink some or all of the model / operations logic. (For example we had started rethinking Exchanges to be much more generic and user defined, inheriting less from the existing world.)
* Emergency maintenance only on NRP, otherwise stop work in favor of other efforts.
* There are some invisible parts of NRP that need improvement: One click installation; new login code; get current with the software libraries we are using; that kind of thing.
* Contribute to the work already going on to develop interoperability between networks: standard vocabulary and protocols, etc. This is needed whether between 2 instances of NRP where there are resource flows between networks in different instances of the software (like Sensorica and the media collective), or 2 instances in totally different software, making it totally flexible what any network chooses to use, as long as each software platform can speak the language to each other.

NOTE: The above is a gathering of earlier thoughts, and is somewhat of a mish-mash.

The goal is for people to come up with specific proposals that everyone can discuss and vote on.

Hoped for result:
1. Agreement on governance and project principles.
2. Agreement on what specific initiatives the funding will support, preferably weighted.


Frederic Durville
Wed 16 Sep 2015 9:00PM

I believe this project should move forward irrespective of what happens with sensorica.


Bob Haugen Wed 16 Sep 2015 9:37PM

@fredericdurville - thanks, it will. We've been working on this for years, and have no intention of stopping. Got several other networks in motion.


Abran Khalid Wed 16 Sep 2015 10:41PM

@bobhaugen @lynnfoster

What is happening to the world. The preachers need to be preached to now. Lynn and Bob, you should not abstain. You are as much part of the Sensorica core as anyone else. Without both of you working the magic behind the scenes, we would have pitched battles over money allocation and rewards every month.

So I don't accept you noble gesture of abstaining. I demand your vote for the same reason you encourage me to dive in at the deep end of discussions that are usually way above my pay scale.


Abran Khalid Wed 16 Sep 2015 10:45PM

@lynnfoster @bobhaugen , can you also please also give a rough description of the role such a team would play. A brief description of what tasks you had in mind that would help you work with the Sensorica affiliates better would do.


Bob Haugen Wed 16 Sep 2015 10:55PM

@abran - I really appreciate your kind words. We are continuing to work on the NRP software as well as a couple of other related software projects. We abstained only because we want to get a reading from Sensoricans, and we are actually a peer network. Sensorica has been very important to us and the software, but we will go on even if Sensorica decides to stop working with us on software. It is not a noble gesture.

We want to continue to work with Sensorica. Don't misunderstand. It has been a great collaboration. We want more of your input on the My Work page, for example.

Were we to vote, it would be of course in agreement with Lynn's proposal.

But it would also be legitimate for Sensorica to say, ok, Bob and Lynn have taken it as far as they could, we need fresh eyes.


Bob Haugen Wed 16 Sep 2015 11:01PM

@abrankhalid - continued: you wrote "can you also please also give a rough description of the role such a team would play. A brief description of what tasks you had in mind that would help you work with the Sensorica affiliates better would do."

A lot of this would be up to the participants in the funded project, which we expect would include us but also others.

We think it should involve an much-accelerated feedback loop. One necessary component would be one or more people who were deeply involved in the UI design for the project who were also involved in the Sensorica work. At least one should be in Montreal. The other could be anywhere, but should be an active participant in Sensorica projects.

We personally (me and Lynn) would prefer to pull back from programming and be more like consultants. That will most likely not be possible; we will probably need to be actively involved in creating an API. But sooner or later, we want consultant hats and badges and to become elders.


Lynn Foster Thu 24 Sep 2015 6:38PM

@tiberiusbrastavice you are the only missing vote from the core group. It is important to us that you put in your thoughts here, given the history of what happens with fundraising. If you don't agree, you can let us know what you would like changed and we can discuss it. But we do need to know where we stand.


Bob Haugen Sun 4 Oct 2015 1:43PM

Here's what we are thinking about, given the votes and other signals of continued interest in using and improving the NRP/VAS/Whatever software, and also signs of improved democratic participation in Sensorica.

Mostly, maybe we could have an active feedback loop again. If so, it would be a shame to abandon it.

We do have features we want to develop in the software that an active feedback loop with Sensoricans could help with.

This is not about the next generation of the software, or a funded infrastructure project, but it might lead into that (which I'll discuss as yet another topic). It's about continuing work on the current project, which we have been unsure we wanted to do.

  1. Yes, UI improvements. We've seen ideas from @abrankhalid , @fredericdurville , @mariafrangos and @fabioballi . And some interest from @johndanger. We'll start another Loomio discussion to probe where this set of ideas could go. If we get an active team working on UI/UX design, we'll work with them.

  2. Lynn wants to develop ExchangeTypes, which will allow defining a network's own types of exchanges, like Fiscal Sponsorships or Crowdfunding. This was started but has a lot more to do, really a whole re-think of the exchange model to be much more flexible and less traditional business oriented. This will also fix the confusing annoyances (like having to do 2 steps) and bugs in the current exchange logging.

  3. We both really want to develop work collaboration features and would love to have some people focus on that with us.

  4. Likewise, I'm interested in rethinking iterative R&D with people who do that. We have never supported that well, and possibly don't know how to.

So what do you all think? We'll start another discussion about #1. Any interest in 2, 3, or 4? If so, we'll start separate discussions about each of them.


Frederic Durville Mon 5 Oct 2015 3:23PM

I would be happy to participate as much as I can, which is not always much....
Anything that can improve collaboration is good...
I am willing to spend some time to evaluate different features or give my 2-cents.



Fabio Balli Mon 5 Oct 2015 5:43PM

@bobhaugen I'd be glad to contribute, directly for 1 and 4, and for 2 and 3 if it at the same time helps Breathing Games move forward.

Load More