Who Owns Hive?

in #dev3 months ago

image.png

(Image created with Dall-E)

Who Owns Hive?

While trying to contribute to Hive I had quite the epiphany this morning.
To a lot of people this is trivial, but I never realized how fundamental the following is.

The code is hosted at https://gitlab.syncad.com/

Syncad is @blocktrades' product.
I always was aware of that and already complained about it, because Github is the gold standard for any blockchain, ever since Bitcoin:

https://github.com/bitcoin

Back then, @gtg answered in his usual manner, but getting a reply once in a blue moon is already a big deal...

It's because on gitlab we got EGTR and roflmao and on github you'd have to pay for the feature.

I didn't have the slightest idea what these things meant, and I still don't so I made the words up, because I am too lazy to actually search his reply. It's on chain (somewhere).
That didn't make much sense to me, because no matter how expensive the feature may be, they had funds for all sorts of things, which are objectively much less important. I didn't want to walk into the trap of discussing github features I don't know about, though. I felt like the comment was designed to expose me and divert attention from what I was actually asking. I left it at that.

Hosting the code on github is so standardized, that if you check out your favorite coin on coingecko (It's what I am using, but the following probably works for all other important cryptocurrency data aggregators), you can navigate to the 'Developer' tab:

image.png

(Screenshot using chrome; Slightly altered for privacy reasons and comprehensibility)

It might take a moment after you click, because that queries github directly...
Once it all loads, you get a flood of information about the whole repo:

image.png

(Another screenshot from coingecko.com, cropped)

I'd say: Coingecko and the others expect you to provide the github link for listing.
When you check out 'our' Hive, you will notice that it's here:

https://github.com/openhive-network/hive

As a sidenode: Had they developed the fork on github to begin with, they might have noticed, that the name 'Hive' was taken hundreds of times over. There, Hive is called 'openhive-network', I guess because 'openhive' was also already taken.

github.com/openhive-network/hive, at least as far as I understand, is just mirroring syncad.gitlab.com/hive.

inb4: 'Well, acshually it's not really a mirror image, but a ...'

https://gitlab.syncad.com/hive

If you follow me, you might know, that I am trying to contribute to Hive now.
To open a PR I made an account with syncad.gitlab.
I have since only browsed there, trying to figure out what I have to do.

Then it hit me:

image.png

(Screenshot from gitlab.syncad.com/hive, cropped)

A new @dan is the owner. It's @blocktrades.
He is in full control, about this software called 'Hive'.
He decides, who decides, what PRs to accept and which to reject.

Again: To a lot of people this is trivial and super obvious.
To me it wasn't, really - at least not to that extent.

Not a conspiracy

This is not an elaborate conspiracy I have discovered here.
I am not claiming that nobody was aware of that.

I feel like hosting on syncad.com serves as a layer that obfuscates these mentioned facts, though.
I am not claiming that it is intentional, but to me it seems a little bit too convenient.

I was just annoyed that the url syncad.gitlab.com was a bit clunky compared to github.com
Like, why would you go that extra step? Why do you force contributors to register on this private server? Some people are trying to make a name for themselves on github, by contributing to different repos. It's like a social network for some.

Why is Hive going this extra route?
It could easily be because it really was more convenient at the time of the fork, just regarding workflow and stuff. But why is it still living there and not on Github?

This was before Microsoft went all weird about Github. That could be a really good argument, today, and I would believe it, but it wasn't at the time.

Someone has to own the repo and I am glad @blocktrades did it.
There is nothing wrong with that. On the contrary: I appreciate it.

Still, seeing it this morning, triggered me to write this post.

TL;DR:

@blocktrades owns Hive. (at least the repo)
That is not bad.
I just think that this crucial information could be conveyed in a more transparent manner.
I wrote this post to make others aware, who weren't on to it, yet, just like myself.



not posting into #hive-devs community - never have I gotten so few eyes on a post of mine. instead of making the content more accessible, it hides it.
'communities' were just poorly designed and add no value. (but maybe that's good content for another rage-post)

Sort:  

Well that's new knowledge to me.

What is the actual risk here? I asides the obvious from the word "owns", I still can't decide if that translates as "Blocktrades holds enough influence to just turn the network off".

Forgive my ignorance on these topics.

As I tried to express: It's not a risk by design.

Blocktrades holds enough influence to just turn the network off

No, we could fork it and take other measures.
blocktrades also holds a significant stake, though.

I also suspect him to hold the keys to large ninja-accounts, too, but I have 0 evidence for that. I could be totally wrong here and I don't want to throw silly accusations around.

As I said: Someone has to own the repo, and I am glad it's bocktrades.

Without him, we quite possibly would have never had Hive or any powerful fork like it to begin with.

I also like him, he's quite a chill dude.
I don't think he will 'turn the network off' as he holds so much stake... he would shoot himself in his own foot, metaphorically. vested interest and stuff. it's the beauty of DPOS.

...

I hope this adresses your concerns sufficiently.

Thanks for the clarification, but at the same time, does this not put him in a position to be on top of the list of targets for shits like legal crackdowns?

With the SEC and all?

The idea of blockchain codes still relying on centralized systems is something I am still yet to figure out why?

Aren't there no less concentrated solutions to this?

Does Github solve this in any way, I have little knowledge about it and have frankly believed it poses its own threats.

If anyone can lawyer up enough and has experience in these things it would be blocktrades.

Regarding github: since it's fully owned by microsoft, it's another form of centralized.

Don't forget that even if the code is centrally hosted and maintained, it is still open source. There are copies of it distributed everywhere. If one place were to shut down, that still could never kill the code.

Banner Firma inglés.gif

@elcomentador is a Comment Curation Project.

We reward valuable feedback. We encourage engagement on Hive.

Earn passive income while supporting engagement. Join our curation trail.

|| Direct link ➡️ HERE. || 👩‍🏫 See our tutorial guide.

💬 Do you like our work? 😀 Consider voting this comment and help us grow! 💬
If you want to know more about the comments and their importance in the Hive blockchain, visit the hashtag #hivecomments

| Curador: @garybilbao |

!BEER

Kannste den Scheiss bitte lassen? Danke

Für mich ist das eine kleine aufmerksamkeit die ich dalasse wenn ich einen beitrag lese und so unwirsch hat bisher auch noch niemand darauf reagiert.
Aber ist akzeptiert und ich werde mich in zukunft fernhalten.

Geh heulen

Dumme und unfreundliche Menschen gibt es überall, damit kann ich umgehen.


Hey @felixxx, here is a little bit of BEER from @thehockeyfan-at for you. Enjoy it!

If you like BEER and want to support us please consider voting @louis.witness on HIVE and on HIVE Engine.

IF I remember right, when microsoft bought github all the purists left.
I don't know about gitlab's ownership, but I would worry about coming in one morning and the repo being gone, on both of them.

Can git not be run locally?

I think we need a better term than 'owns', as at any point anybody can fork the code and do their own thing, they just need enough people to make it viable.

bru

syncad.gitlab.com is local.

Well, then that is a good enough reason for me to leave github when microsoft bought them out.
I wouldn't want ms having license to watch over my shoulder, either.

And again: both replies were completely unnecessary.
You did not read my post. Why comment?
I now remember, why I muted you.

!lol

Whats the nuttiest Band in the history of rock and roll
The Allmond Brothers.

Credit: reddit
@felixxx, I sent you an $LOLZ on behalf of antisocialist

(1/4)
Delegate Hive Tokens to Farm $LOLZ and earn 110% Rewards. Learn more.

This could be why there's no major whale investment, anyone doing their due diligence would suspect this and steer well clear.

I mean a super HNW individual may still punt six figures, but millions, probably not.

Like I tried to express in the post:
It's not necessarily a bad thing.

What I think is lacking is communication.
Why are there year old open issues in the repo?
Who is reponsible, and what is their goal?
Who wrote the 'new whitepaper'? <- that one I'll try to discuss in my next post...

Do you watch the video dev discussions, or listen to them rather, maybe some clues in those..?

I did read through some of the transcripts, yes.

https://peakd.com/dev/@felixxx/why-we-cant-have-nice-things-linux
...

There might be a nugget hidden in them here and there, but I feel like they have little value to me. I want to discuss the fundamental, underlying principles, not the intricacies of the architecture.

I have been deep diving into this shit ever since I joined the blockchain 7 years ago. I taught myself code, and design and all sorts of other stuff and I have a good base knowledge (some gaps here and there) of what's going on, I think. If this is too complicated for me, then it is certainly way too complicated for the average newbie.

These 'discussions' just feel like a big: 'the ball is your court now', like it's my job now to filter out and understand what was discussed.
I am not saying what they are building is bad, because I don't know.
I am saying: if it's too complicated and too hard to explain, then it sucks.

I have compiled a pretty decent presentation of how cryptography, blockchain and bitcoin works, and what this technology offers.
Got invited to a company and held my presentation for 40 minutes maybe and was applauded for it. Had excellent follow up questions from the audience.
I can explain this stuff to people, who have no prior knowledge, quite well.
Could have done the same for Steem.
I didn't even know what a blockchain was, when I first found Steem. Took me maybe a week and some questions to understand its fundamentals and the idea just resonated with me ever since then. There was a goal, a defined purpose.
With Hive, I don't even know what the goal is, though.

You should read my blog more :P

I will do, you're way ahead of me on this stuff!