Ah ok, then we’re in one boat and I can tell you from experience that copying the walletS.dat will not work. But I wouldn’t call a Raspberry Pi an application-specific integrated circuit … it can not only run the nud client but also the nubot
“ASIC of PoS” is in terms of the energy efficiency.
ASICs of PoW have a very good energy per hash ratio that makes them ore energy efficient than non-ASIC solutions.
The “ASIC of PoS” is very energy efficient as well
As we know there’s no benefit of accelerating the speed with that the minting calculations are executed. But reducing the energy that is needed for doing the necessary calculations leads to a better energy efficiency.
Volia - the ASIC of PoS!
Ok, then I can’t vote just yet. I go to my farm where the PoS ASIC is once in a couple of weeks or so. Luckily my vote wouldn’t immediately change anything anyway.
…time to configure feeds…
Is 0.5.3 out already?
Practically we have the source code for building and integrating with NuBits wallets. We have built an open source library (NuBitsJ) which can be used by developers for any NuBits integration. Same as BitcoinJ which is used for integration with Bitcoin in several developments. There is also an open source blockexplorer with limited API ( https://svr1.nubitsexplorer.nu). So one could argue that NuBits as a currency is already open source. NuShares, voting, parking etc is not. Is that a real problem right now? I still believe it is not (yet). There is only a lot of noise made about it by forum posters who presumably don’t know what this is about
Is Coinbase open source? BTER? Bitstamp? No, and they are still trusted to some extent… But Bitcoin is!
You gave the reason why Coinbase, BTER and Bitstamp are only trusted to some extent while Bitcoin is trusted fully
Bitcoin is open source!
Make Nu open source as well!
Even with NuBitsJ available Nu will lose lots of opportunities.
To rely on NuBits requires to rely on Nu(Shares) as well.
It’s not sufficient to have NuBitsJ…
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.
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 .
@assistant motion vote 6f361693a7b248730b41d4292f89dc6f6f166bc8
Here are the details for the Motion Vote on 6f361693a7b248730b41d4292f89dc6f6f166bc8:
Blocks: 2954 (
Share Days: 889452338 (
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
setvote < vote > is probably what I would need.