I hate to ask hard questions for such a charming project, but this has been haunting me for a while: how will URAllowance solve the Oracle problem?

Or in plain English: how does URAllowance deal with the lack of discipline and cheating?

Introducing a timer to the smart contract condition is quite a clever invention.

My worry stems from the opposite: that parents are too lenient, resulting in rewards for jobs done half-assed or not at all, effectively spoiling the kid.

If the timer running out results in a reward it is too easy for the parent to become lazy. No complaints from the kids either. Therefore I would suggest the timer running out to result in no reward or a partial one, so that both the parents and the kids have to keep interacting with the contract.

I think with URAllowance, parents still need to act with responsibility. If their actions cause their children to spoil, URAllowance can't prevent it. It is just a tool for parents and children can interact with smart contracts. It is a good way to discipline but it can't do everything alone. Parents need to be responsible.

When we are kids We think our parents are gods. No one is more responsible, no one is stronger, no one is scarier, no one makes you feel safer. As a parent, I realize, that is not the truth. Parents, myself included, can be lazy, irresponsible, selfish and ignorant. I try but it proves to be increasingly difficult as time goes on. A tool that forces any level of accountability would be a welcomed part of my routine.

If you think about it, parenting has concepts that also exists in economy and politics - just scaled down to a family level.

The Oracle problem I talked about before is something you will experience with URAllowance, id est: how do you translate a real life event into an accurate digital input for the smart contract? For example, when the job is to clean up their room, how do you make sure a dirty room does not result in a green check mark? In this case, the parents are the Oracles. Can they be trusted with themselves? The same goes with logistics projects on the blockchain. How do you make sure a package is indeed correctly delivered in order to signal it was a success to the smart contract? In that case, is the deliverer a trustworthy Oracle, or is there a possibility the deliverer fails to deliver the package while telling the smart contract it was received?

This becomes a lot easier when signals do not have to cross the border between the digital and analog world. For example, a job could consist of a math exam. The solution can be verified by a trustworthy Oracle, a calculator, and sent directly to the smart contract without any human intervention. In fact the calculator can be designed in such a trustworthy way, having no dependency on a centralized, possibly untruthful Oracle, one could say it is a trustless system, because no trust is required for the correctness of the system, other than the trust in the system as a whole.

That last bit may surprise you. Yes, even a trustless system requires a base level of trust. You could go as deep as not trusting 1 + 1 = 2.

I get your point about Oracles but if you think about that, Oracles are parents in this program and if they give a duty to their children, it is logical that they will decide whether is it enough or not. Even if you do a ai that can check the jobs and give red or green mark to it, if a parent is irresponsible enough can say "hey don't be sorry here is 200$ for you to spend on pc game, don't tell your mother"

The ultimate thing is parents need to be responsible. If they are not, URAllowance is not a magician. Just a tool for parents to help themselves.

Well in case of a parents child relationship both have to trust each other or there have to be put in specific rules for for example how a cleaned up room has to look like. For example no toys on the floor, not just put into the closet but sorted or what ever. I think in this case there will be some solutions.

I would like to think of it this way, that URAllowance is a project that will further the relationship between parents and kids and will eventually lead to a more harmonious relationship between them.

These are some of the most constructive criticisms I've heard yet. It seems then that "trustless" is a term that is being tossed around rather loosely in the crypto world. Any time humans are involved in the verification process of any event, trust is reintroduced to the equation. Aside from having A.I. controlled surveillance systems connected to smart contracts, the best possible solution I can come up with right here on the spot is... Incentivised honesty and penalized laziness. You have got me thinking. I appreciate your comments. Please stick around. I'm sure as others read this conversation, more ideas and solutions will begin presenting themselves. Thank you, sir.