NEM (XEM) Official Thread - 100% New Code - Easy To Use APIs

[contraband]

It doesn't mean Microsoft would own NEM. It just doesn't guys, so you can stop posting all the Microsoft fine print. 

[LemonAndFriesOne]

It doesn't mean Microsoft would own NEM. It just doesn't guys, so you can stop posting all the Microsoft fine print. 

Then why do you supposed a mega corporation has interest in an open source project that is crowdfunded and could very well be a huge competitor in the future?

Don't forget how they have been brought up on claims of becoming a monopoly and buying out early start ups before.

Don't forget how Windows 10 is free but on the cost of sending your information back to central servers for who knows what.

[contraband]

It doesn't mean Microsoft would own NEM. It just doesn't guys, so you can stop posting all the Microsoft fine print. 

Then why do you supposed a mega corporation has interest in an open source project that is crowdfunded and could very well be a huge competitor in the future?

Don't forget how they have been brought up on claims of becoming a monopoly and buying out early start ups before.

Don't forget how Windows 10 is free but on the cost of sending your information back to central servers for who knows what.

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

[Thingamajig]

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

You're obviously not serious.

It's more about influence, especially influence in an emerging market -- and i'd put good money on Microsoft wanting the first (And thus biggest) cut of that pie just to obtain it.

Ironically in doing so all they're doing is enabling centralization again and this is only going to stifle and monopolize things further.


I think this agreement needs to be made perfectly clear before anything is signed, and to proceed with great caution when dealing with any large companies -- this is the side of finance and "agreements" I just simply cannot tolerate. Vague definitions that don't actually mean what is implied or imply something not what is meant. It's all smoke and mirrors akin to a pickpocket getting his buddy to distract you while he rifles through your stuff.

Because in the end, when you shift through this wordplay and legal bullshit;  you've either gained, lost, or are a victim -- not unless you're the one to write the "agreements"

[LemonAndFriesOne]

It doesn't mean Microsoft would own NEM. It just doesn't guys, so you can stop posting all the Microsoft fine print. 

Then why do you supposed a mega corporation has interest in an open source project that is crowdfunded and could very well be a huge competitor in the future?

Don't forget how they have been brought up on claims of becoming a monopoly and buying out early start ups before.

Don't forget how Windows 10 is free but on the cost of sending your information back to central servers for who knows what.

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

Guessing? There's documents of the monopoly charges that have been raised against this corporation, even Europe has sued them for doing this.

A quick google search will show you.

Here let me help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

[Nxtblg]

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

You're obviously not serious.

It's more about influence, especially influence in an emerging market -- and i'd put good money on Microsoft wanting the first (And thus biggest) cut of that pie just to obtain it.

You hit the nail right on the head. Microsoft just wants in on the Hot New Thing.

Ironically in doing so all they're doing is enabling centralization again and this is only going to stifle and monopolize things further.

And with this, you've hit upon a subject that's been bothering me somewhat. It's pretty clear that there's a natural tendency towards centralization, even in this space: just look at how the big exchanges have fared as compared to truly decentralized exchanges (to take a single example.) We just seem to fall into line.

Question: is this tendency a result of us being habituated to the age that we live in, or is there something in our wetware that tugs us towards the more centralized option? I really wonder...

[contraband]

It doesn't mean Microsoft would own NEM. It just doesn't guys, so you can stop posting all the Microsoft fine print. 

Then why do you supposed a mega corporation has interest in an open source project that is crowdfunded and could very well be a huge competitor in the future?

Don't forget how they have been brought up on claims of becoming a monopoly and buying out early start ups before.

Don't forget how Windows 10 is free but on the cost of sending your information back to central servers for who knows what.

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

Guessing? There's documents of the monopoly charges that have been raised against this corporation, even Europe has sued them for doing this.

A quick google search will show you.

Here let me help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

This has nothing to do with it. Stay on track

[Thingamajig]

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

You're obviously not serious.

It's more about influence, especially influence in an emerging market -- and i'd put good money on Microsoft wanting the first (And thus biggest) cut of that pie just to obtain it.

You hit the nail right on the head. Microsoft just wants in on the Hot New Thing.

Ironically in doing so all they're doing is enabling centralization again and this is only going to stifle and monopolize things further.

And with this, you've hit upon a subject that's been bothering me somewhat. It's pretty clear that there's a natural tendency towards centralization, even in this space: just look at how the big exchanges have fared as compared to truly decentralized exchanges (to take a single example.) We just seem to fall into line.

Question: is this tendency a result of us being habituated to the age that we live in, or is there something in our wetware that tugs us towards the more centralized option? I really wonder...

Wealth always becomes centralized, there's no escaping it.

Decentralization can only be strived for much like fairness or equality, but even this has to be within reasonable restrictions because anything greater is a naive pipe dream. Life is unfair, Without the poor people, a rich man cannot be rich.


I got into crypto not because of some naive notion of decentralization forever, but more due to open-ledger, blockchain technology. A technology that will help prevent bank corruption and manipulation, and in truth, will provide better settlement over paper FIAT that can be printed from nothing.

Bitcoin is a double whammy in centralization as not only can the accumulation of bitcoin become centralized (Unavoidable), but so can it's mining power - and as it's mining power becomes centralized, it's ledger itself does too. Effectively empowering miners with the same influence bankers have today. So i can't help but laugh when i see BTC fanatics preach decentralization, when the POW algorithm is the worst fix for it XD

[Nxtblg]

Wealth always becomes centralized, there's no escaping it.

Decentralization can only be strived for much like fairness or equality, but even this has to be within reasonable restrictions. Life is unfair, Without the poor people, a rich man cannot be rich.

I hear ya. Sad to say, the world and human nature don't make for a neat fit to our ideals.

And there's also the Pareto Principle to consider. I know this sounds weird, but some rich folks might be successful bagholders at heart. Remember the "Free and Fair" fad - and how many folks just took their stakes and dumped? Exactly the same thing happened in post-Communist Russia ,when it was the C.I.S.: the privatization process was essentially the same as the "Free and Fair Distribution" model. A large majority of folks just sold off their shares for pocket money, many for far less than the shares were worth. The buyers who vacuumed up those shares formed the nucleus of the new oligarchs.

In more ways than one, 2014 was a disillusioning year.

[Thingamajig]

Wealth always becomes centralized, there's no escaping it.

Decentralization can only be strived for much like fairness or equality, but even this has to be within reasonable restrictions. Life is unfair, Without the poor people, a rich man cannot be rich.

I hear ya. Sad to say, the world and human nature don't make for a neat fit to our ideals.

And there's also the Pareto Principle to consider. I know this sounds weird, but some rich folks might be successful bagholders at heart. Remember the "Free and Fair" fad - and how many folks just took their stakes and dumped? Exactly the same thing happened in post-Communist Russia ,when it was the C.I.S.: the privatization process was essentially the same as the "Free and Fair Distribution" model. A large majority of folks just sold off their shares for pocket money, many for far less than the shares were worth. The buyers who vacuumed up those shares formed the nucleus of the new oligarchs.

In more ways than one, 2014 was a disillusioning year.

Greed is an inherent human trait, and i think when equality is on the cards, people frequently forget this -- and get burnt as a result. It's why i don't like Communism .


But yeah, I get what you're saying.

[LemonAndFriesOne]

It doesn't mean Microsoft would own NEM. It just doesn't guys, so you can stop posting all the Microsoft fine print. 

Then why do you supposed a mega corporation has interest in an open source project that is crowdfunded and could very well be a huge competitor in the future?

Don't forget how they have been brought up on claims of becoming a monopoly and buying out early start ups before.

Don't forget how Windows 10 is free but on the cost of sending your information back to central servers for who knows what.

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

Guessing? There's documents of the monopoly charges that have been raised against this corporation, even Europe has sued them for doing this.

A quick google search will show you.

Here let me help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

This has nothing to do with it. Stay on track

Let me guess, let's not fathom a mega corporation trying to take out potential future competitors, instead let's focus on temporary satisfaction of having a quick P&D for being listed with Azure instead of thinking about the possible long term benefits of a project like NEM succeeding on its own.

[contraband]

It doesn't mean Microsoft would own NEM. It just doesn't guys, so you can stop posting all the Microsoft fine print. 

Then why do you supposed a mega corporation has interest in an open source project that is crowdfunded and could very well be a huge competitor in the future?

Don't forget how they have been brought up on claims of becoming a monopoly and buying out early start ups before.

Don't forget how Windows 10 is free but on the cost of sending your information back to central servers for who knows what.

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

Guessing? There's documents of the monopoly charges that have been raised against this corporation, even Europe has sued them for doing this.

A quick google search will show you.

Here let me help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

This has nothing to do with it. Stay on track

Let me guess, let's not fathom a mega corporation trying to take out potential future competitors, instead let's focus on temporary satisfaction of having a quick P&D for being listed with Azure instead of thinking about the possible long term benefits of a project like NEM succeeding on its own.

I have NEMs long term future in mind. But that has nothing to do with this.

You are paranoid.

Monopoly - sure
Trying to steal the altcoins - ridiculous

What the hell? It's just not the play going on here with azure. LOL

[LemonAndFriesOne]

It doesn't mean Microsoft would own NEM. It just doesn't guys, so you can stop posting all the Microsoft fine print. 

Then why do you supposed a mega corporation has interest in an open source project that is crowdfunded and could very well be a huge competitor in the future?

Don't forget how they have been brought up on claims of becoming a monopoly and buying out early start ups before.

Don't forget how Windows 10 is free but on the cost of sending your information back to central servers for who knows what.

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

Guessing? There's documents of the monopoly charges that have been raised against this corporation, even Europe has sued them for doing this.

A quick google search will show you.

Here let me help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

This has nothing to do with it. Stay on track

Let me guess, let's not fathom a mega corporation trying to take out potential future competitors, instead let's focus on temporary satisfaction of having a quick P&D for being listed with Azure instead of thinking about the possible long term benefits of a project like NEM succeeding on its own.

I have NEMs long term future in mind. But that has nothing to do with this.

You are paranoid.

Monopoly - sure
Trying to steal the altcoins - ridiculous

What the hell? It's just not the play going on here with azure. LOL

I don't think you read right, I never said they are trying to steal the altcoins. Maybe patent and control the tech behind them, yes. Not steal them. Go back and read where I mentioned that, you will find none.
There is enough scammers in cryptoworld already doing that. 

[apullman]

Can we just use the pay as you go plan without signing a agreement?
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/tag/baas/

I would be wary of Microsoft too. As with all big corporate entities, EULA's and T&C's are written for their best interest.

On a related note, it is crazy the amount of personal data Microsoft collects. It is written to basically cover anything one would do on a pc.
This is from the January 2016 Microsoft Privacy Statement
https://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/

"Personal Data We Collect"
"We collect your first and last name, email address, postal address, phone number, and other similar contact data."

"We collect passwords, password hints, and similar security information used for authentication and account access."

"We collect data about you such as your age, gender, country and preferred language."

"We collect data about your interests and favorites, such as the teams you follow in a sports app, the stocks you track in a finance app, or the favorite cities you add..."

"We collect data necessary to process your payment if you make purchases, such as your payment instrument number (such as a credit card number), and the security code..."

"We collect data about how you and your device interact with our services. This includes data, such as the features you use, the items you purchase, the web pages you visit, and the search terms you enter..."

"We collect data about your contacts and relationships if you use a Microsoft service to manage contacts, or to communicate or interact with other people or organizations."

"We collect data about your location, which can be either precise or imprecise. Precise location data can be Global Position System (GPS) data, as well as data identifying nearby..."

"We collect content of your files and communications when necessary to provide you with the services you use. For example, if you receive an email using Outlook.com, we need..."

"We also collect the content of messages you send to us, such as feedback and product reviews you write, or questions and information you provide for customer support..."

"Reasons We Share Personal Data"
"We share your personal data with your consent or as necessary..."

It does not say you will be asked for your consent, it seems to be stated indirectly that you consent to it.

Windows 10 privacy settings.
https://imgur.com/l0xUUo4

[Microove]

We wait jabo38
Do have answer from Microsoft first

Indeed, things may be changing along the road.

[yshin365new]

We wait jabo38
Do have answer from Microsoft first

Indeed, things may be changing along the road.

Glad to see NEM community is full of energy and heat. 

[patmast3r]

There is nothing in the agreement that suggests that they would own NEM or gain any rights other than on the code that we submit. As is clearly stated. We submit jack shit. 0 lines of actual NEM code is being submitted.

I'm not a legal expert but so far I haven't heard anyone clearly explain what sections of the agreement would grant microsofts rights to actual NEM code and why. Don't say you're not a legal expert so you shouldn't make assumptions. If you guys are all lawyers than explain some stuff to us and maybe we won't think you're paranoid anymore.

You guys just keep pointing out sections. Those sections don't sound problematic to most people because they only seem to entail the code we submit. Which again is very little and not at all related to actual code of NIS.

Anyway, we're never all going to agree so we might as well stop discussing it.

[patmast3r]

There is nothing in the agreement that suggests that they would own NEM or gain any rights other than on the code that we submit. As is clearly stated. We submit jack shit. 0 lines of actual NEM code is being submitted.

I'm not a legal expert but so far I haven't heard anyone clearly explain what sections of the agreement would grant microsofts rights to actual NEM code and why. Don't say you're not a legal expert so you shouldn't make assumptions. If you guys are all lawyers than explain some stuff to us and maybe we won't think you're paranoid anymore.

You guys just keep pointing out sections. Those sections don't sound problematic to most people because they only seem to entail the code we submit. Which again is very little and not at all related to actual code of NIS.

Anyway, we're never all going to agree so we might as well stop discussing it.

*removing useless quote of the cla*

“Project”
means any of the projects owned or managed by Microsoft and offered under a license
approved by the Open Source Initiative (www.opensource.org).

Sounds to me like the moment you Submit Code to their Azure platform (the Project) they own you. They use words like Code and Submit to cover the entire project, it's capitalized because it refers to the definitions given in the agreement. If it was as simple as you claim it to be, there wouldn't be a problem indeed, unfortunately it's not that simple. Would be nice to have some confirmation from a laywer indeed. 

The project is Azure.
The moment you submit code they own that particular code. Since the code is almost nothing I'd be fine with that.

[McDoxy1]

Sounds to me like the moment you Submit Code to their Azure platform (the Project) they own you. They use words like Code and Submit to cover the entire project, it's capitalized because it refers to the definitions given in the agreement. If it was as simple as you claim it to be, there wouldn't be a problem indeed, unfortunately it's not that simple. Would be nice to have some confirmation from a laywer indeed.  

No it doesn't cover the entire project. The definitions are also quite clear. With "Project" they refer to the project you are contributing to, namely Microsoft Azure, and the code your are submitting are just a few templates.

I have no idea how you can interpret this into it. Also it just wouldn't make any sense, because everybody can submit templates to Azure. They don't have to be actively involved with NEM or whatever crypto. A random person could just submit a few templates and Microsoft would own NEM? Sry, not buying it.

This would also mean that Microsoft now owns WordPress, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Redis, CakePHP, Django, C#, Node.js, PHP, Python, Ruby,... fucking Java? I think Oracle would have a word to say about that.

[b1007]

Sounds to me like the moment you Submit Code to their Azure platform (the Project) they own you. They use words like Code and Submit to cover the entire project, it's capitalized because it refers to the definitions given in the agreement. If it was as simple as you claim it to be, there wouldn't be a problem indeed, unfortunately it's not that simple. Would be nice to have some confirmation from a laywer indeed.  

No it doesn't cover the entire project. The definitions are also quite clear. With "Project" they refer to the project you are contributing to, namely Microsoft Azure, and the code your are submitting are just a few templates.

I have no idea how you can interpret this into it. Also it just wouldn't make any sense, because everybody can submit templates to Azure. They don't have to be actively involved with NEM or whatever crypto. A random person could just submit a few templates and Microsoft would own NEM? Sry, not buying it.

This would also mean that Microsoft now owns WordPress, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Redis, CakePHP, Django, C#, Node.js, PHP, Python, Ruby,... fucking Java? I think Oracle would have a word to say about that.

Maybe I wasn't quite nuanced, but see my last post, I think there is reason to be suspicious.