Ocean Protocol

Data exchange protocol to unlock data for AI

[Short general description]: Ocean is a protocol and network that incentivizes data providers to provide a vast supply of high-quality data, for use in training artificial intelligence (AI) models. 

 

Ocean incentivizes not only high-quality priced data but also high quality public or commons data. In turn, this helps to power data marketplaces. Ultimately, Ocean intends to develop a protocol and network - a tokenised ecosystem - that incentivises making this data available. 

 

[Main problems tackled]:

 

1) Strong incentives to submit, refer, and make available quality data. 

2) Curation market for reputation of data. 

3) Only keeper nodes provably making high-quality data assets available will be able to reap rewards

4) Block rewards for a given data are distributed based on amount of stake in that data asset, and its popularity

 

[Innovation]:

 

1) marketplaces - a place where providers and consumers can interact

2) keepers - which collectively maintain the network

3) user registry - whitelist of good actors

4) data curation - list of available data

5) data pricing - either free or requested price by provider for data access. 

6 ) verification - via a challenge response mechanism that makes sure the keeper actually made a data set available. 

 

Token design: challenge-response protocols where (1) in case of the data having to leave the provider’s premise, a history of provenance for all the consumer’s received data is published to Ocean’s immutable record and where (2) in case of an on-premise computation the data consumer is provably guaranteed a correct model execution on the purchased data. 

 

Ocean core software uses several building blocks, either as libraries or connecting to them via networks. This includes IPDB4 network running BigchainDB5 software for storing metadata and COALAIP6 rights. Data blobs themselves may be stored on-premise, on the centralized cloud, or on the decentralized cloud. On-premise storage may pair with on-premise processing; in which case only the result of the processing is made available to the data consumer.

 

Ocean incentivizes not only high-quality priced data but also high-quality public or commons data, making a substrate for decentralized data marketplaces.

ICO Rating Analysis
Team Evaluation
4.50 / 5.00
Product
4.33 / 5.00
Token Economics
4.50 / 5.00
Business Evaluation
4.00 / 5.00
Hype and media presence
4.00 / 5.00

Analysis

Team - Founders:
Are the founders known? Do they have relevant experience and connections?
5
  • 1. Unknown people. No serious background information available.
  • 2. Partial information available, no relevant experience.
  • 3. Background information available, no relevant experience.
  • 4. Solid, relevant background and connections available.
  • 5. Solid, well known, experienced and well connected founders.
Team - Advisors:
What level of commitment, experience and connections do the advisers bring?
4
  • 1. No reputable advisors with relevant experience.
  • 2. Few advisors with little to no relevant experience.
  • 3. Advisers with relevant experience.
  • 4. Reputable advisors with relevant experience and connections.
  • 5. High profile highly experienced, well connected and committed advisors.
Product - Technology Layer:
Is the product innovative? Does it contribute to the blockchain ecosystem?
5
  • 1. No, the product is just a clone with no contribution.
  • 2. The product is a dapp with minimal interest and little contribution to the ecosystem.
  • 3. The product is a dapp, exchange or protocol addressing a real problem or need.
  • 4. Innovative product offering a solution to a high interest problem.
  • 5. Innovative protocol tackling critical problems of highest interest.
Product - Proof of concept:
Is the proof of concept comprehensive? Does it address a real problem or need?
5
  • 1. No, incoherent concept or no need for it.
  • 2. Difficult concept to understand, hardly any need or problem to solve.
  • 3. Clear concept which addresses a real problem.
  • 4. Clear, well thought concept which addresses a real problem of high interest.
  • 5. Exceptional proof of concept addressing a critical problem.
Product - MVP:
Has the concept been tested? Is there an MVP? How far is the launch?
3
  • 1. Untested concept.
  • 2. Initial tests, no MVP.
  • 3. MVP ready, Alpha launch.
  • 4. MVP ready, Beta launch.
  • 5. Fully working initial product.
Token Economics - Token utility:
Does the token have any utility? Is it a core function to the network?
4
  • 1. No, the token has no utility.
  • 2. Token has a limited, unclear utility.
  • 3. The token has some added, but not inherent value.
  • 4. The token is embedded in the network and has inherent value.
  • 5. The token has both inherent and added value and is embedded at the core of the network.
Token Economics - Network effect:
Are strong network effects built into the system? Are incentives aligned to encourage the growth of the network?
5
  • 1. No network effects built in.
  • 2. Minimal network effects, unclear incentives.
  • 3. Network effects and incentives present.
  • 4. Solid network effects with clear incentives due to inherent utility.
  • 5. Strong network effects, aligned incentives and high utility value.
Business Evaluation - Valuation:
Is the valuation reasonable ? Sufficient but not too high for the scope of the project?
3
  • 1. No, the valuation is ludicrous, the project could do with 1/10 of the sum.
  • 2. Valuation is higher than the project would need. Likely a money grab.
  • 3. Valuation is reasonable for the scope of the project.
  • 4. Valuation is modest for the caliber of the project.
  • 5. Valuation is impressively modest relative to the high caliber of the project.
Business Evaluation - Market potential:
What is the market potential? Does the project look like it could penetrate the market and conquer the world?
5
  • 1. No clear market potential.
  • 2. Limited market potential.
  • 3. Reasonable market and growth potential.
  • 4. Solid market and growth potential.
  • 5. Exceptional market and growth potential.
Business Evaluation - Competition:
Does the project have competition? How strong does it look relative to its competition?
4
  • 1. Awful position competing with many strong players.
  • 2. Weak position facing strong competition.
  • 3. Reasonable position facing strong competition.
  • 4. Solid position facing weak competition.
  • 5. Exceptional position, facing almost no competition.
Business Evaluation - Supply sold:
Does the team distribute a reasonable amount of the tokens so as to encourage create strong incentives and network effects?
3
  • 1. Negligible supply, greedy team.
  • 2. Small supply, poor incentives.
  • 3. Modest supply, weak incentives.
  • 4. Reasonable supply, responsible team.
  • 5. Large supply, solid inventive, committed team.
Business Evaluation - Vesting:
Does the team have a sufficient stake to have aligned incentives? Do they have a vesting schedule implemented?
5
  • 1. Large stake, no vesting.
  • 2. Small stakes, no vesting.
  • 3. Modest stakes, no vesting.
  • 4. Reasonable stakes, modest vesting.
  • 5. Solid stake, healthy vesting.
Hype and media presence:
Is the project present on social media and chats? Is there interest for it?
4
  • 1. No presence, negative image.
  • 2. Modest exposure and no interest.
  • 3. Reasonable exposure and modest interest.
  • 4. Solid exposure and high interest.
  • 5. Exceptional exposure, high interest and considerable hype.
Final Score
4.38

Team

Member
Bruce Pon
Founder / Board Member
Trent McConaghy
Founder
Chirdeep Chhabra Singh
Founder
Daryl Arnold
Founder
Donald Gossen
Executive Director & Co-Founder
John Enevoldsen
Growth
Masha McConaghy
Founder / CMO
Cristina Pon
Marketing Director
Oana Ionescu
Strategy and Community Marketing
Timothy Ley
Data Analyst
Matthias Kretschmann
Developer
Gregory McMullen
Chief Policy Officer
Wojciech Hupert
Designer
Sylvain Bellemare
Software Engineer
Tim Daubenschütz
Developer
Dimitri De Jonghe
Head of Research & Co-Founder
Gautam Dhameja
Application Engineer
Jernej Pregelj
Blockchain Application Engineer
Muawia Khan
DevOps Engineer
Shahbaz Nazir
DevOps Engineer
Rodolphe Marques
Technical Architect
Alberto Granzotto
Developer
Troy McConaghy
Developer
Kamal Ved
Executive Director
Daniel Lustig
Operations Executive
Katarzyna Kazimierczak
Head Of Operations
Ricardo Garcia
Business Developer
Manuel Rodriguez
Developer

Advisors

Julian Leitloff
Co-founder & CEO of Fractal Blockchain

Updates

Title
Published at
Data + Blockchain + Toolkits = Music to AI’s Ears…
3 months ago
XPRIZE® & Ocean Protocol — Moving AI Forward at the Speed of Teamwork
3 months ago
Ocean Protocol Foundation and Mattereum partner to bring a legal backstop to decentralization
2 months ago
Ahoy, Sophia!
1 month ago
A Token Distribution to Fund a Data Economy
1 month ago
How much could a new Data Economy and Data Economy token be worth?
3 weeks ago
How Singapore is providing a living lab for the Data Economy and Ocean Protocol
2 weeks ago
Documents you need to prepare for the Ocean Protocol Pre-Launch Distribution Whitelist
2 weeks ago
Ocean Protocol Technical Whitepaper
4 days ago