To be honest, as a shareholder of Steem (which is licenced by Steemit Inc.) I expected some kind of explanation why this happen. From my point of view explanation is not given.
He’s the right person to head development in the interim as we transition into the future.
what doesn't matter because this code doesn't belong to us. If someone would like to introduce new changes which will be good for whole community but bad for Steemit Inc., that would be impossible to do that legally.
Steem code base has to be fully open-source and have open licence.
That license, which Dan came up with, has been there since day 0. That is as long as any of us have opted into participating. In the long run, I would see the license change, but not now.
That certainly sheds a different light on his (deleted) post about wanting Steem to be open source. It is okay that he changed his mind about it, but to portray Steemit as some sort of enemy of freedom by having a restricted license given that he came up with the license seems misleading at best.
That's the best thing I've heard all day.
But again, we have to trust you, @ned. In a world of trustless cryptographically secure systems and provably secure smart contracts, asking for trust is a lot to ask.
Completely feel you on this and perhaps something can be done to assuage the concern. from my pov I am relying on DPoS, and not on Steemit or me. Witnesses can be anonymous and the system runs whether Steemit tries to be part of it or not... I'm glad we are though.
Thanks Ned. I appreciate your community involvement today, especially when it's been such a stressful one. That speaks volumes about your character and your commitment to the future.
Not like the PoW projects, actually DPOS is based on trust. We have been trusting from the beginning.
That's a valid point, but PoW has other problems, which I'm sure you're aware. With Bitcoin, as an example, we now have to trust the large mining firms/guilds not to collude together for their own benefit. We have to trust changes will be implemented that benefit everyone instead of being stalled by the powerful. I remember a point in time where a large mining guild decided to split up (against their own short term interests) because the community was too concerned with the percentage of hashing power they controlled. I was glad they did it, but it reminded me how much trust is still involved in PoW as well, even if it's trust that those involved will remain rational actors for their own long-term self interest. At least with DPOS there's a mechanism for making that trust transparent with a voting process everyone can participate in.
FYI - https://steemit.com/license/@timcliff/update-license-md-to-reflect-views-of-steemit-inc-expressed-by-sneak-lawyer-help-requested
Yep, reading it now. :)
the problem is.. that you can be hit by a bus and your opinion will not help us then.
Absolutely. Competition and outside innovation under a GNU/BipCot/Creative Commons license benefits everyone, including Steemit.
This is crypto not stock its how we do.
https://steemit.com/license/@timcliff/update-license-md-to-reflect-views-of-steemit-inc-expressed-by-sneak-lawyer-help-requested