|
Secondleo
|
 |
June 02, 2014, 10:18:00 PM |
|
Did you consider keeping part of the project closed source?
Well, I have to take clones into consideration, that's for sure. At first I planned to put as much info on the wiki as possible, but then looked at the current altcoin scene and changed my mind. Open source is great, but when it comes to dealing with money it results in a lot of harmful noise and confusion. And it would be ridiculous if your ideas appeared in some scam coin first: not only you would look like a copycat later, but the users would now have strong negative emotions attached to these ideas! So if anyone has any thoughts about how to protect against scam-clones, I'd like to hear it. No solution seems good: traps in code, delay source code release by a version or two, keeping a part closed, they are all bad...  I think a closed source might get interesting if you provide a) an alternative and b) an incentive to use the closed source application. So, a part of the system is handed as a pretty shitty but working version, open source. At the same time an alternative piece of code/app is there, that is 100% compatible with the network, works like a charm but is closed source. This has some downsides to it as well of course. Beginning with the additional two fold work and surely a lot more. I'll think a bit more about the pros and cons and such. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
onemorebtc
|
|
June 02, 2014, 10:20:23 PM |
|
what do you think about the idea to put a license in there which forbids uses of another genesis block or does not follow simcoin proto rules? ^^ you dont have to sue before they really have big money (if any)  |
transfer 3 onemorebtc.k1024.de 1
|
|
|
|
mcjavar
|
|
June 02, 2014, 10:32:18 PM |
|
Any update on the developments?
I am satisfied with the progress, that's all I can say at the moment  Are you sure that this is the way to interact with your investors? |
|
|
|
|
|
NxtChg (OP)
|
|
June 02, 2014, 10:32:34 PM |
|
This has some downsides to it as well of course. Beginning with the additional two fold work and surely a lot more.
All these solutions have one major drawback - they erode confidence. Open source protects users. Limiting it requires more trust in developers and they already have way too much power... --- @onemorebtc: yeah, like scam-clones are gonna respect the license What's next, patenting my algorithms?  If a clone ever gets to a point where you can sue them, then you have no moral right to do so - it's a legitimate clone, this should be allowed. |
|
|
|
|
NxtChg (OP)
|
|
June 02, 2014, 10:35:49 PM |
|
Are you sure that this is the way to interact with your investors?
You too?! What is it today, a solar storm? Do you want your share diluted more? Then, sure, I can give all the progress reports you want... |
|
|
|
|
onemorebtc
|
|
June 02, 2014, 10:35:57 PM |
|
@onemorebtc: yeah, like scam-clones are gonna respect the license What's next, patenting my algorithms? why not?
If a clone ever gets to a point where you can sue them, then you have no moral right to do so - it's a legitimate clone, this should be allowed.
nice answer and you are right but i dont think ANY clone could have access with users when they all think that they may have to pay for the code they are using |
transfer 3 onemorebtc.k1024.de 1
|
|
|
|
mcjavar
|
|
June 02, 2014, 10:55:37 PM |
|
Are you sure that this is the way to interact with your investors?
You too?! What is it today, a solar storm? Do you want your share diluted more? Then, sure, I can give all the progress reports you want... Don´t take it as an offense. I don´t want it diluted more, ofcourse. For me it´s enough when you tell me that things are going on well and there is development going on behind the courtains. |
|
|
|
|
|
NxtChg (OP)
|
|
June 02, 2014, 10:59:39 PM |
|
Don´t take it as an offense. I don´t want it diluted more, ofcourse. For me it´s enough when you tell me that things are going on well and there is development going on behind the courtains. Sorry, there are days when people seem to suddenly congregate here with pitchforks |
|
|
|
|
NxtChg (OP)
|
|
June 03, 2014, 06:00:11 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
drawingthesun
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
|
|
June 03, 2014, 06:59:12 PM |
|
Besides, if my ideas are proven correct then soon every coin will be an instant coin and speed advantage will be lost.
Do you have any plans that allow your coin to survive people copying your core features? |
|
|
|
|
|
NxtChg (OP)
|
|
June 03, 2014, 07:33:41 PM |
|
Do you have any plans that allow your coin to survive people copying your core features?
 |
|
|
|
pandher
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
Stagnation is Death
|
|
June 03, 2014, 09:51:24 PM |
|
I suggest keeping things closed source till a significant lead is established
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secondleo
|
|
June 03, 2014, 10:36:36 PM |
|
I suggest keeping things closed source till a significant lead is established
Question: Can a significant lead be established with a closed source? I would add a philosoraptor, but I have no idea how to make one with minimal effort. |
|
|
|
|
|
Secondleo
|
|
June 04, 2014, 10:02:49 AM |
|
So, thinking about the problem of closed or open source I think I may have found a possible way to get credibility while maintaining a closed source project.
It goes in the lines of peer review and won't be easy by any means.
One thing to do, is to let the crypto code core scrutinized by an expert. Preferrably a paid expert. Someone with a name could get paid to go through it and confirm that the implementation is working and doesn't have any security flaws.
Next is the downloadable client.
If the coin can get a certificate of at least one anti virus program company, like antivir or avira, the question of safety regarding the client should be solved.
Of course, there would still be the need to provide proof that the offered files are the right ones.
Nevertheless, I think an approach like this might offer the option of gaining a significant lead without disclosing the sourcecode.
|
|
|
|
|
|
NxtChg (OP)
|
|
June 04, 2014, 10:45:18 AM |
|
...Preferrably a paid expert...
I was always against paying somebody to review your system. For arguments you can dig up the old NXT topic Basically, it's wrong to pay someone to rate you, the recent banking crisis is a good example. It's Ok to hire a company to do an internal audit for you, but not Ok to pay somebody to vouch for you publicly. Nevertheless, I think an approach like this might offer the option of gaining a significant lead without disclosing the sourcecode.
It all depends on how awesome Simcoin will be and nobody knows that, including me. We just have to wait and see how badly people want the darn thing |
|
|
|
|
NxtChg (OP)
|
|
June 04, 2014, 11:38:46 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secondleo
|
|
June 04, 2014, 07:40:01 PM |
|
...Preferrably a paid expert...
I was always against paying somebody to review your system. For arguments you can dig up the old NXT topic Basically, it's wrong to pay someone to rate you, the recent banking crisis is a good example. It's Ok to hire a company to do an internal audit for you, but not Ok to pay somebody to vouch for you publicly. Nevertheless, I think an approach like this might offer the option of gaining a significant lead without disclosing the sourcecode.
It all depends on how awesome Simcoin will be and nobody knows that, including me. We just have to wait and see how badly people want the darn thing Actually, it's not about rating. It's about saying it works/ does not work. Not to answer the question how it is compared to others. Also, bringing up the banking crisis isn't exactly on the same terms. If they would only rate in "this makes money / this definitely will not make money" it could be compared. But it's apples and oranges. But anyway. Any form of legitimacy for a closed source is welcome. The worst case scenario is keeping the source closed and doing nothing anyway. Same goes for simply open source. Right now cryptoworld is just not the enviroment you want to release new code to. Also +1 for xkcd |
|
|
|
|
|
NxtChg (OP)
|
|
June 04, 2014, 08:01:25 PM |
|
If they would only rate in "this makes money / this definitely will not make money" it could be compared. But it's apples and oranges.
"subprime mortgages will definitely make money!" Good enough comparison for you? Anyway, let's not start that whole argument all over again... The worst case scenario is keeping the source closed and doing nothing anyway. Same goes for simply open source. Right now cryptoworld is just not the enviroment you want to release new code to.
The best option seems to delay opening the source and try to gain as much lead as we can. If Simcoin will be any good, it won't be hard I think releasing the NXT source a month earlier was a mistake. We can probably delay it longer and get away with it. NXT just started to look good enough, so it as well could have been a test net up until now... |
|
|
|
|
NxtChg (OP)
|
|
June 04, 2014, 10:12:10 PM |
|
 Woo-hoo! I've just added a new account all the way from the client, through consensus of 4 nodes and into the ledger database in each one of them! Now all I have to do is basically add various types of transactions. Well, not that simple, of course, the devil is in the thousand tiny details, but still, I am happy that the core mechanics is now working! (By the way, it's my 59th coding day). |
|
|
|
KLONE::Vader
Member
Offline
Activity: 89
Merit: 10
|
|
June 05, 2014, 06:43:13 AM |
|
Dev, please could you give me some thoughts about handling/shrinking blockchain size?
|
|
|
|
|
