And yet they are doing well as businesses. Same for NuNet as a business.
YES for NuBits open source (it already is, yahoo!), NO (for now) to Nushares and our unique selling points open source.
Why not, if you only need to work with it as a currency?
One part of my answer is:
Another part of my answer is: it’s so much harder to educate companies and people about ways to circumvent Nu’s code not being open source than to just open source it.
Nu had some adoption from the start. Nu will get more adoption even if it stays closed source. The question is: will it get enough adoption compared to competitors which are already on the market or which will arise?
I don’t even know ho much adoption would be sufficient, but anyway my answer is simple:
the more adoption the better!
An open source license is a big step towards more adoption.
1 Like
Absolutely
There is another approach in which Nu is regarded as a company. (in the sense it is ).
A company needs to make profits and needs to face competition.
In that context, one can argue Nu cannot afford giving away and disclosing its secret sauce.
The difference between bitcoin and Nu is that Nu is a DAC and bitcoin is code.
So here is my question. What is the secret sauce of Nu?
If the secret sauce is NSR, then one can argue NSR should not be open sourced.
But then I am not coding NSR and Nu etc…
I cannot judge whether or not it is the cas.
So I need the know the stance of the main developers, including @JordanLee .
1 Like
Hi @cryptog
Here are the details for the Motion Vote on 6f361693a7b248730b41d4292f89dc6f6f166bc8:
##[6f361693a7b248730b41d4292f89dc6f6f166bc8][1]
[1]: https://discuss.nubits.com/t/voting-motion-to-make-the-nu-source-code-available
Blocks: 2954 (29.540000%)
Share Days: 889452338 (29.449932%)
This is the finalize motion to make the Nu source code open to the public. For more information about this proposal, and to view discussions about what items some community members belived should be completed on the development roadmap before they will vote for this motion, see:
getting 29.540000%. Rising.
1 Like
Hi, I made a little voting analysis for this motion in another thread: Ternary Voting Concept
In total I think its looking good for this motion, there seems to be a huge influx of new votes. Comments and critics are very welcome.
1 Like
I think what @Hyena might mean iss that sign NDAs with e.g. btc-e and bitstamp, have them review Nu source code and have the bots ready to run (might take weeks), then open source it on the same day when the bots get online. The timing such that nu will attain its preeminent and open source status at the same time.
1 Like
Note that you can’t have two wallets minting with the same coins simultaneously because they will find the same kernel at the same time and the netwrk is designed to reject duplicate blocks. You block will be orphaned.
I thought there is a way to work around. If you have your raspi minting all the time, and you want you laptop to take over with hte same wallet, you can adjust the clock of you laptop to get ahead of time by 6 minutes, so that your laptop will find the block first, and have the network to confirm it before the raspi also finds it. This didn’t quite work out for me because my laptop and raspi keep sync’ing thier clocks back to the correct time and I can’t bother to spend more time on it. Please report back it this works. I would also like to hear from @sigmike or other devs whether this practice is not going to work or not good to the network.
The motion requires a new release of the client with the updated license and some other changes, which is the reason for the 45 day time window.
There is no reason to wait to open the source code after the motion has passed, however. It will be opened immediately upon passage of the motion.
2 Likes
Actually I think I might have a better idea. I would code a small voting proxy/bot that polls either nubits or bitcoin block chain and seeks for special messages implanted by me and signed by me that would instruct the PoS ASIC to vote. However, that would only be possible under the assumption that Nu daemon has RPCs for motion voting.
edit:
setvote < vote > is probably what I would need.
Yes, that’s exactly what I had in my mind.
getting 31.30% of shareholders total votes. still rising.
1 Like
Not the same as being open source unfortunately. Many projects or services will need to make modifications to the code for it to work in their implementation, or add needed features. For instance @erasmospunk wasn’t able to add NuBits to Coinomi until we had made an update to the code and compiled a custom binary for him. This update had to be added to Peercoin as well. Having the right values or a pre-build library is not the same as having access to the code. It seriously inhibits the work of developers.
Coinbase is a company that works on top of an open source project. If bitcoin wasn’t open source they probably wouldn’t be able to provide the service that they do. I don’t think it’s an apples to apples comparison. NuNet is more of a protocol, or a set of rules. Like TCP/IP, or HTML. Having that open set of rules allows people to build services and products on top of it. By opening up the source code we’ll allow people to build services and products on top of NuNet. Especially noting my former remark that they may need to make a customization to the software itself for their own purposes.
That’s fine, and my apologies if I misinterpreted the remarks. It still doesn’t resolve having more eyes on the code and development before more complexities are added. it doesn’t give us widespread trust in the eyes of crypto enthusiasts. It doesn’t allow developers the ability to customize the code for their own projects and services to work with Nu. It literally just adds two exchanges to the list. Considering we’re having enough of a difficult time finding LPC’s I don’t think adding a couple of exchanges to our list would provide much of a benefit. We need other creative people building services and uses for NuBits. To me that would be a bigger boost than adding a couple of exchanges. Why not just go open source and let them add us at their leisure? If we have more services available that support NuBits (besides exchanges) it would be in their best interest to add us anyway.
2 Likes
Hi @cryptog
Here are the details for the Motion Vote on 6f361693a7b248730b41d4292f89dc6f6f166bc8:
##[6f361693a7b248730b41d4292f89dc6f6f166bc8][1]
[1]: https://discuss.nubits.com/t/voting-motion-to-make-the-nu-source-code-available
Blocks: 3492 (34.920000%)
Share Days: 1033293935 (34.106592%)
This is the finalize motion to make the Nu source code open to the public. For more information about this proposal, and to view discussions about what items some community members belived should be completed on the development roadmap before they will vote for this motion, see:
getting now 34.92%. still rising.
1 Like
I officially just completed reading the entire NuBits forum, currently 787 threads with 10,500 posts, many of them very lengthy and detailed. It took me around 5 weeks of constant reading, 5-6 hours on weekdays (around my work schedule) and pretty much all day on the weekends. I never thought it would take me this long, but I’m done! 
Anyway, I saved this thread as the last thing to read on the forum. Coming into it, I was prepared to vote against it, as I’ve been worried about clones popping up and stealing our thunder. However, @CoinGame’s arguments have surprisingly convinced me to vote in favor of open sourcing Nu. By reading some of these posts, it has become clear to me that there is some danger in not open sourcing soon. I won’t repost the reasons here. Just look for his posts above, as they explain it better than I ever could.
5 Likes
Getting now 36.77%. Still rising. 
1 Like