Is Gulden a good investment?

[BioMike]

Good luck folks! Gulden is becoming even worse than Ripple. Closed source and a dictator running the show that makes Jamie Dimon look like Santa Clause!

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!

Closed source wallet/daemon  sounds legit

License-wise they are allowed to do this, but functionality (if it really works and people actually want it) could be reverse engineered relative easily. Unless they add additional layers to hide the workings, which would be paranoia for nothing, and counteract their goal of mass adoption.

@cryptoba, maybe I did, maybe I didn't, maybe I'm planning to and maybe I already bought back lots more.

[cryptoba]

Good luck folks! Gulden is becoming even worse than Ripple. Closed source and a dictator running the show that makes Jamie Dimon look like Santa Clause!

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!

Closed source wallet/daemon  sounds legit

License-wise they are allowed to do this, but functionality (if it really works and people actually want it) could be reverse engineered relative easily. Unless they add additional layers to hide the workings, which would be paranoia for nothing, and counteract their goal of mass adoption.

@cryptoba, maybe I did, maybe I didn't, maybe I'm planning to and maybe I already bought back lots more.

I am sure you kept or bought more...you are a wise man @ this price you are filling your bags for Christmas   

[DubMatrix]

The answer from the developer is missing here:

To clear up the above before anyone gets confused. There are lots of different kinds of "open source" and different ideas about what "open source" should mean and they are not all compatible with one another.
For every "open source" project there is a license that dictates what is and is not okay to do with the product, if you care about such things you should read the license and not just assume that open source means "anyone can copy".

Gulden is not "open source" if you go by the strict OSI definition https://opensource.org/osd

Gulden is open source for the definition of open source we consider important:
* Anyone can view/inspect our source code
* Anyone can compile our code
* Anyone can modify our code for personal use so long as they don't give it to anyone and/or as long as it is not modified to work on a different blockchain.
* Anyone can  submit patches to our code etc.

This explicitly does not include copying/modifying the software for the purposes of using it on a blockchain that is not the Gulden one, or distributing it to other people etc. without the express permission of the Gulden developers.

So to answer the original question:

1) They would be in legal violation of the licensing.
2) The amount of work being done here is far beyond the scope of something a "copy and paste" developer could copy/paste into another existing project successfully. The average copy/paste project differs from bitcoin by only a few hundred lines of code, there are dozens of documents explaining how to make such a project, and even then the 'copy/paste developers' of these projects tend to struggle and make obvious mistakes, Gulden differs by around 40k lines of code at this point and growing, much of this code is of high complexity and easy to mess up, there are no instructions on how to copy this code...
3) This is a lot of work, it is much easier for such projects to just make up fake features like they already do - so I imagine they would prefer to do that.
4) Even ignoring the above we would have first mover advantage and all that they would achieve is to draw attention to us as the original developers, meanwhile we will already be developing the next thing.

In short; I don't really think it is a legitimate concern, but even if it were, so what? Should we just throw our arms up in the air and give up? The way I see it there is only one thing to do, keep going forward...

[RichPissman]

The answer from the developer is missing here:

To clear up the above before anyone gets confused. There are lots of different kinds of "open source" and different ideas about what "open source" should mean and they are not all compatible with one another.
For every "open source" project there is a license that dictates what is and is not okay to do with the product, if you care about such things you should read the license and not just assume that open source means "anyone can copy".

Gulden is not "open source" if you go by the strict OSI definition https://opensource.org/osd

Gulden is open source for the definition of open source we consider important:
* Anyone can view/inspect our source code
* Anyone can compile our code
* Anyone can modify our code for personal use so long as they don't give it to anyone and/or as long as it is not modified to work on a different blockchain.
* Anyone can  submit patches to our code etc.

This explicitly does not include copying/modifying the software for the purposes of using it on a blockchain that is not the Gulden one, or distributing it to other people etc. without the express permission of the Gulden developers.

So to answer the original question:

1) They would be in legal violation of the licensing.
2) The amount of work being done here is far beyond the scope of something a "copy and paste" developer could copy/paste into another existing project successfully. The average copy/paste project differs from bitcoin by only a few hundred lines of code, there are dozens of documents explaining how to make such a project, and even then the 'copy/paste developers' of these projects tend to struggle and make obvious mistakes, Gulden differs by around 40k lines of code at this point and growing, much of this code is of high complexity and easy to mess up, there are no instructions on how to copy this code...
3) This is a lot of work, it is much easier for such projects to just make up fake features like they already do - so I imagine they would prefer to do that.
4) Even ignoring the above we would have first mover advantage and all that they would achieve is to draw attention to us as the original developers, meanwhile we will already be developing the next thing.

In short; I don't really think it is a legitimate concern, but even if it were, so what? Should we just throw our arms up in the air and give up? The way I see it there is only one thing to do, keep going forward...

Trouble is, even if you think you're on the right track, you will get run over by a train if you just sit there! And that's exactly what Gulden has been doing over the last year, staying steady at the same $ price, while bitcoin went x 18! So you might say the Bitcoin train ran you over multiple times already!

[DubMatrix]

This year they started at $0.025828 and right now it about $0.093968. Maybe not your avarage quick win, but I'm sure BitCoin has been sitting just there for years too. Sure, it was new and a method of buying on the dark web which helped its popularity. For Gulden I see a good future since it already has actual user, this time in the legit world.

[RiseandFall]

The answer from the developer is missing here:

To clear up the above before anyone gets confused. There are lots of different kinds of "open source" and different ideas about what "open source" should mean and they are not all compatible with one another.
For every "open source" project there is a license that dictates what is and is not okay to do with the product, if you care about such things you should read the license and not just assume that open source means "anyone can copy".

Gulden is not "open source" if you go by the strict OSI definition https://opensource.org/osd

Gulden is open source for the definition of open source we consider important:
* Anyone can view/inspect our source code
* Anyone can compile our code
* Anyone can modify our code for personal use so long as they don't give it to anyone and/or as long as it is not modified to work on a different blockchain.
* Anyone can  submit patches to our code etc.

This explicitly does not include copying/modifying the software for the purposes of using it on a blockchain that is not the Gulden one, or distributing it to other people etc. without the express permission of the Gulden developers.

So to answer the original question:

1) They would be in legal violation of the licensing.
2) The amount of work being done here is far beyond the scope of something a "copy and paste" developer could copy/paste into another existing project successfully. The average copy/paste project differs from bitcoin by only a few hundred lines of code, there are dozens of documents explaining how to make such a project, and even then the 'copy/paste developers' of these projects tend to struggle and make obvious mistakes, Gulden differs by around 40k lines of code at this point and growing, much of this code is of high complexity and easy to mess up, there are no instructions on how to copy this code...
3) This is a lot of work, it is much easier for such projects to just make up fake features like they already do - so I imagine they would prefer to do that.
4) Even ignoring the above we would have first mover advantage and all that they would achieve is to draw attention to us as the original developers, meanwhile we will already be developing the next thing.

In short; I don't really think it is a legitimate concern, but even if it were, so what? Should we just throw our arms up in the air and give up? The way I see it there is only one thing to do, keep going forward...

I don't know why this developer didn't create 10 scam coins instead of 1 legit one. He would of make a lot more money for himself and everyone else who invested in those scams.Add marketing and a scam coin with 1 unique feature that Gulden has and it would of had far more success.

I don't know what it is with this generation but they would rather invest in projects that do a lot of faking then a project like this.

Gulden is the worst investment I have made financially but it is the best investment I have made on a coin that is driving innovation.

I guess the world is just a fucked up place right now.

[gilbsx]

most of the alt coins are going green and yet gulden is still red red red...
and im stuck still holding unto it. 

[bebekbakar]

Or do we not know anything about the possible amount raised so far in presale or regular sales? can anyone help me to study in observing presale tokens for trading? I hope I can take knowledge from your next explanation

[guldenpagina.nl]

Gulden is fine and a good coin for the future
If you don't like it don't buy it thats it!

[altcoinsrule]

Gulden is fine and a good coin for the future
If you don't like it don't buy it thats it!

Yes and water is wet.....

Please explane why the gulden did not profit with a higher price like all other alt coins.

Verge
Doge
Ripple

are higher the last month.

[danijel]

Gulden is fine and a good coin for the future
If you don't like it don't buy it thats it!

Yes and water is wet.....

Please explane why the gulden did not profit with a higher price like all other alt coins.

Verge
Doge
Ripple

are higher the last month.

probably bcoz it is not good coin enough for you 

BTW ,for me it is the best coin out there ....
....

[Marstrand]

Please explane why the gulden did not profit with a higher price like all other alt coins.

The problem is that you associate gulden with profit...

[FantoNas]

Gulden is fine and a good coin for the future
If you don't like it don't buy it thats it!

Yes and water is wet.....

Please explane why the gulden did not profit with a higher price like all other alt coins.

Verge
Doge
Ripple

are higher the last month.

probably bcoz it is not good coin enough for you  

BTW ,for me it is the best coin out there ....
....

If you see the hash rate ... 88 Gh/s of today compare to the top 280 Gh/s in October , it seems that miner do not think like you. It's a huge drop. If you analyse just a little bit ... 88 Gh/s divide by 500 Mh/s (L3+) , you see that only 176 people on the world are mining gulden. It's like nothing. So it could be the best crypto coin in the world , in nobody want it .... you are done.

Do not forget to remove Kim-jong-Rijk and his friends from the 176 miners

[donnatello]

If you see the hash rate ... 88 Gh/s of today compare to the top 280 Gh/s in October , it seems that miner do not think like you. It's a huge drop. If you analyse just a little bit ... 88 Gh/s divide by 500 Mh/s (L3+) , you see that only 176 people on the world are mining gulden. It's like nothing. So it could be the best crypto coin in the world , in nobody want it .... you are done.

Do not forget to remove Kim-jong-Rijk and his friends from the 176 miners

Crypto has always been about soft power and consensus.

Rijk is a masturbatory manager who cares not for anything remotely resembling dissonance.

NLG is in my top three list of most underperforming coin last 12 months.

[RichPissman]

Do not forget to remove Kim-jong-Rijk and his friends from the 176 miners

Kim Jong Rijk 

Isn't that a bit harsh though?

to the Un guy I mean? 

[DubMatrix]

Maybe one day you'll see the potential for this coin. I like the quote from Marsand:

The problem is that you associate gulden with profit...

Some are here for profit while others focus on other things.

[burky156]

Gulden is fine and a good coin for the future
If you don't like it don't buy it thats it!

Yes and water is wet.....

Please explane why the gulden did not profit with a higher price like all other alt coins.

Verge
Doge
Ripple

are higher the last month.

2017 wasn't good year for Gulden, it had to be raised more. I wouldn't invest Gulden anymore i think.. I am Dogecoin fan too. I am collecting DOGE since 2016. I have like 1 million pcs of them and still buying. I think it will be 0.01 soon..

[RiseandFall]

If you see the hash rate ... 88 Gh/s of today compare to the top 280 Gh/s in October , it seems that miner do not think like you. It's a huge drop. If you analyse just a little bit ... 88 Gh/s divide by 500 Mh/s (L3+) , you see that only 176 people on the world are mining gulden. It's like nothing. So it could be the best crypto coin in the world , in nobody want it .... you are done.

Do not forget to remove Kim-jong-Rijk and his friends from the 176 miners

Crypto has always been about soft power and consensus.

Rijk is a masturbatory manager who cares not for anything remotely resembling dissonance.

NLG is in my top three list of most underperforming coin last 12 months.

NLG is the worst coin for making quick greed money but they killing other coins with innovation. Thing is a lot of these ICOs and some coins went in with people that had a lot of btc to put into marketing and fake trades,volumes and price manipulation which works on the suckers thinking their is something special about those coins.
I can respect NLG team for not being fake and keeping it Real because if they did market what they have and coming in the next release it would be bringing the marketing to reality.

[Digithusiast]

Tomorrow, -Friday the 15th-, the first 2 weeks of testing PoW2 including Secure 1-conf transactions, witnessing and segsig have passed.

Hopefully they will provide some feedback on results so far.

[DashNLG]

Tomorrow, -Friday the 15th-, the first 2 weeks of testing PoW2 including Secure 1-conf transactions, witnessing and segsig have passed.

Hopefully they will provide some feedback on results so far.

I expect to see 1000sat fall quickly when there is more proof testing is going well, especially from those investors that are still holding a lot of sub $1000 bitcoin. That is 2 million NLG, just over 0.5% of the entire supply which will be very cheap for some early btc adopters.
Depends who pulls the trigger first.