Bitcoin Forum
November 23, 2017, 11:48:17 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Curse of open source  (Read 1918 times)
lukaexpl
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 132


View Profile
November 09, 2017, 08:04:58 AM
 #21

Quote
That is why billion plus projects like Neo, Ether do not have a decent wallet.
That is why Neo which is supposed to be the next best thing to sliced bread displays your private key and saves it unencrypted in a file.
That is why Mycelium can not implement Segwit addresses for months under HD wallets which probably requires two lines of code.
This is why there is no decent Android bitcoin wallet and the list goes on.....


It is not because they are open source. It is maybe because those developers suck.




So how do we get non-sucking-developers to do it?

Quote
Is there a way out of this curse?
It is a blessing.

I agreed already with that in my second extended post in this thread but it does not answer the question.
1511437697
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511437697

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511437697
Reply with quote  #2

1511437697
Report to moderator
1511437697
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511437697

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511437697
Reply with quote  #2

1511437697
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511437697
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511437697

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511437697
Reply with quote  #2

1511437697
Report to moderator
1511437697
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511437697

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511437697
Reply with quote  #2

1511437697
Report to moderator
Samarkand
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182


View Profile
November 09, 2017, 10:28:35 AM
 #22

...

To summarize, what I wanted to ask is the following:
IS THERE A WAY TO KEEP SUCH IMPORTANT SOFTWARE OPEN SOURCE (to be able to vet it) WHILE STILL PROVIDING MEANINGFUL FINANCIAL INCENTIVE TO DEVELOPERS?



Off the top of my head I can think of at least two sources for meaningful financial incentives that both are in play in the cryptocurrency scene:

1. ICOs
I know most of these are motivated by greed and the easier execution compared to traditional security offerings. However, they could theoretically
be used to fund development of projects. This is already happening with some Ethereum related projects that intend to offer an ICO to pay
for future development.

The most prominent example probably being Raiden:
https://www.coindesk.com/raiden-ico-ethereum-scaling-solution-launch-publicly-traded-token/

2. Incentive due to own coin holdings
Many Bitcoin or altcoin developers are sitting on a huge stash of their respective cryptocurrency of choice. This means that they are directly incentivized
to improve the protocol, because any improvements would likely increase adoption (or at least prevent the fall of adoption or people switching to a more
innovative competitor), which would increase the value of their coins. Let´s say Bitcoin Core developer X has been in Bitcoin for years and has accumulated a
ton of Bitcoins. He has a direct incentive to ensure the security of the Bitcoin code, because such a high percentage of his overall wealth is stored in Bitcoin.

This is basically the same concept that is responsible for Capitalism working so well - or at least better than other systems that have been tried in the history
of mankind. People following their own self-interest ironically creates effects that are beneficial for society as a whole.

Besides, donations are another source of potential financial incentives. However, these are not really meaningful for most projects, because of the low percentage
of people that actually donates to open source projects.

lukaexpl
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 132


View Profile
November 09, 2017, 04:01:04 PM
 #23

...

To summarize, what I wanted to ask is the following:
IS THERE A WAY TO KEEP SUCH IMPORTANT SOFTWARE OPEN SOURCE (to be able to vet it) WHILE STILL PROVIDING MEANINGFUL FINANCIAL INCENTIVE TO DEVELOPERS?



2. Incentive due to own coin holdings
Many Bitcoin or altcoin developers are sitting on a huge stash of their respective cryptocurrency of choice. This means that they are directly incentivized
to improve the protocol, because any improvements would likely increase adoption (or at least prevent the fall of adoption or people switching to a more
innovative competitor), which would increase the value of their coins.

Yeah. That is what I initially thought would be the case but whales of second largest coin by market cap prove me wrong.
They have done jack sit to improve end user experience. Half of the world uses myetherwallet.

What should we expect form micro-whales then?
sivagananathan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12


View Profile
November 10, 2017, 11:13:08 AM
 #24

...

To summarize, what I wanted to ask is the following:
IS THERE A WAY TO KEEP SUCH IMPORTANT SOFTWARE OPEN SOURCE (to be able to vet it) WHILE STILL PROVIDING MEANINGFUL FINANCIAL INCENTIVE TO DEVELOPERS?



2. Incentive due to own coin holdings
Many Bitcoin or altcoin developers are sitting on a huge stash of their respective cryptocurrency of choice. This means that they are directly incentivized
to improve the protocol, because any improvements would likely increase adoption (or at least prevent the fall of adoption or people switching to a more
innovative competitor), which would increase the value of their coins.

Yeah. That is what I initially thought would be the case but whales of second largest coin by market cap prove me wrong.
They have done jack sit to improve end user experience. Half of the world uses myetherwallet.

What should we expect form micro-whales then?


I understand that you can increase your user base by targeting the less experienced coders and providing them with support for all the previous applications,but how are you so supposed to improve your own product when you can’t get rid of the parts which are not as good.
haltingprobability
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
November 10, 2017, 04:30:28 PM
 #25

To summarize, what I wanted to ask is the following:
IS THERE A WAY TO KEEP SUCH IMPORTANT SOFTWARE OPEN SOURCE (to be able to vet it) WHILE STILL PROVIDING MEANINGFUL FINANCIAL INCENTIVE TO DEVELOPERS?

luka: These are good questions. Let me point you to a book that I think you will hugely benefit from reading - Against Intellectual Monopoly. Contrary to popular belief, intellectual property (patents, copyrights, and other forms of "closed source" design) have not accelerated human progress, they have slowed it down.

It is true that division-of-labor and specialization are an indispensable ingredient for human progress, including - or especially - in the development of new technologies, like Bitcoin. And in order for division-of-labor to obtain, people have to have a way to be paid for their labor in terms of a good that is directly valuable to them or can be readily exchanged for goods that are directly valuable to them. This is one reason why money is so important - it greatly facilitates the division-of-labor by allowing many different kinds of people with many different kinds of skills to be paid with something that has no use-value in itself (you can't eat a paycheck) but can be instantly exchanged for almost anything that does have use-value (you can use your paycheck to buy a meal or clothes or whatever).

Mozilla, the Linux Foundation, certain distributions of Linux, and many other companies work with open-source software as an integral part of their business model. Richard Stallman prefers the term "free software" but distinguishes "free" as in free speech from "free" as in free beer. Free software is really about the former, not the latter. If you really think about it, being able to copy and run an installer is not the culmination of a software business's product. Microsoft, Apple and all the old-school software houses work on this false notion that the software product is really the copy that gets installed. But then, their actual products put the lie to this notion with all their insecure, automatic, background updates that have to be run continually to prevent all kinds of catastrophic scenarios in their end users' devices. In short, software is not really the physical bits, it is the entire package of design that is sold to the end-user.

If you take the free software concept seriously, it will change how you think about software completely. All the individual tools that get packaged into a Linux distribution are provided to you free of charge, if you use a gratis Linux distro but, more importantly, they are free to use as you like (including for building your own software). You can build very powerful software systems just from these ingredients because these tools are all Unix tools or tools that follow the Unix philosophy. But suppose you want to write your own, custom factory management tool. You have everything you need right in front of you. But even if you have the requisite skills (software engineering), you do not have the time because you have a factory to run! So, what do you do? Well, you pay someone to use this free software system to design and build a factory management tool for you. Do you see that the free software does not hinder but only facilitates the division-of-labor, in this case? You might reason, "Ah, but when he has finished writing it, I cannot make any money off of it because when I release it on Github, it has to be GPL licensed because it uses GPL'd software." But that's missing the whole point. First of all, no one is compelling you to release it. If your trade-secret factory-management software is such a huge boost to your business, then you will simply keep it to yourself and not share it with the world. Profit! But if you do release it, then you should have designed it in such a way that other software engineers can build and extend on your work, that is, you should have designed it in a way that is consistent with the Unix philosophy. Now, someone can come along and re-purpose your code for something else entirely that you never thought of - perhaps it turns out that your code is super-useful in oceanography applications, something you had never considered in your wildest imagination. But closed-source software guarantees that this kind of innovation through repurposing of code can never happen. The free software philosophy boils down to this assertion: the public good created by the repurposing of code is so immense that the private good to any one individual of keeping their code closed-source is easily outweighed (in principle, they could be paid the difference out of the public good) so that the only sensible way to keep code closed-source is simply to retain it as a trade-secret (never to release the software to anybody and only use it yourself).
micheal wang
Newbie
*
Online Online

Activity: 24


View Profile
November 12, 2017, 01:29:39 PM
 #26


It seems a bit difficult to get out of the curse because it is integrated directly with the system
 Embarrassed
MartPlatform
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 6


View Profile
November 13, 2017, 07:16:42 AM
 #27

Anything has it own advantage and disadvantage. When you use it, you should know about it. If you think you can not stand with it, so do not use. That's an advice from my heart. Open source help a lot of programmer reduce the time, and spread the technology every where.  Smiley
lukaexpl
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 132


View Profile
November 13, 2017, 10:22:33 AM
 #28

A quote from Coinomi summarizes best the frustration of developers that I tried to imagine (as I have not been in the situation myself):

Quote
[/We do what we have to do to protect our users and our brand. Coinomi is a free wallet and its source code is open for everyone to review, but if you're asking us to allow just about anyone to create malicious clones of our wallet and steal users' funds and give up all rights to go after these scammers and their works then no, it's not going to happen. On top of that, I would strongly recommend you to be very careful when making unsubstantiated accusations in public such as that Coinomi Wallet "is no longer free" and that it was governed by a "fishy" license, as these could imply direct defamation of our firm.quote]
Oceat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


Bountie- Do You Have Game?


View Profile
November 13, 2017, 10:24:45 PM
 #29

Usability, safety and ergonomics of most cryptocurrency products is brutally substandard compared to any other software.

The course of open source is obvious.
If you do not leave your code open source you gain no trust.
If you do you risk being forked with an one-liner, so what is the point?

That is why billion plus projects like Neo, Ether do not have a decent wallet.
That is why Neo which is supposed to be the next best thing to sliced bread displays your private key and saves it unencrypted in a file.
That is why Mycelium can not implement Segwit addresses for months under HD wallets which probably requires two lines of code.
This is why there is no decent Android bitcoin wallet and the list goes on.....

Is there a way out of this curse?
That is the mantra of Microsoft and Mac Fanboys. Open source is weak. So how about your antivirus. It is not open source but most of them even anti-malware are crappy to say the least. Nobody is even sure if they are really removing what they are suppose to remove. Nobody is bold enough to sue this fraudsters. Most microsoft oriented softwares are frauds but nobody is complaining.
He's just probably complaining all of the no good applications he encountered that fails and doesn't met his requirements i guess. Why not make a possible thoughts about it? Not everyone is complaining about all of this open source codes but still failing but instead they ask someone for help to better improve their coding. I guess you were just looking on the dark side of it.

Psyloc9302003
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 15


View Profile
November 13, 2017, 11:58:55 PM
 #30

Is it a curse yes..for those programmer which dosn't know how to think out of the box and always rely on customize library or code..for those who always think out of the box and wants freedom this is a blessing..
kernighan
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 05:18:27 AM
 #31

I do think opensource is the unstoppable trend. Openstack is one of very successful open source project, I think. And various license, MIT, GPL, LGPL BSD could also protect the author partially.

There are multiple big companies supporting openstack. still developers could benefit from it. Eventually decentralized autonomous organization/corporation could be the major final state.
Kakmakr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120

★ ChipMixer | Bitcoin mixing service ★


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 06:44:19 AM
 #32

I think as a developer it must suck, if your code is merely "copy & pasted" by a inferior developer and then used for their personal gain. Like we are seeing being done with Bitcoin now. Most of these forks are just a copy & paste job and it is not backed by good developers.

The fact that it is then pumped to replace Bitcoin, is actually a slap in the face to the developers who contributed the most to the original Bitcoin. Satoshi's code being raped and pillaged by people who says that they are protecting it. ^joke^

wiebemarten
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12


View Profile WWW
November 14, 2017, 04:24:26 PM
 #33

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512


The fun fact about open source software, is that this is software in which it is not required to have a business model built in. This means that suddenly completely different design choices are possible.

Forking an open source project is not a weakness, it is a strength: If the original version of some tool is wide-spread, then people know that version and will keep using it. If, however, it turns out to have some flaws that the original development team does not fix, then it is possible for people to move to their own variant.

If it is at all possible to reconcile, developers will by using Pull Requests. And if it is not, then it is great to create two versions, where each version is better suited for some particular requirients.

> IS THERE A WAY TO KEEP SUCH IMPORTANT SOFTWARE OPEN SOURCE (to be able to vet it) WHILE STILL PROVIDING MEANINGFUL FINANCIAL INCENTIVE TO DEVELOPERS?

Yes, there is. Companies like GitLab and Piwik do so with great success :-).



By the way, it is also possible to open-source paid software, and open-source software in such a way that you are the only party that is allowed to make money from it. Don't think that all projects have to go 'all the way' to FOSS (Free and open source).

~Wiebe-Marten


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=HSty
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
sicparvismagna
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
November 15, 2017, 05:42:39 AM
 #34

Don't you think you are way too over-acting sir because some of your foremention are not the fault of the cyrptocurrencies it always varies on how use it and how you secure your coins. Simply curse starts with us not handling way our transaction and not ensuring the safety of every negotiations or deals we put through.

FUD Expert
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
Today at 08:46:01 AM
 #35

The curse is on you Sir and don't blame open-source if those coins that I'm sure you hold is not pumping to the moon.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!