Nxt Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Latest Nxt Client 1.11.9 - NEW RELEASE: Ardor 2.0.3e TestNet IS LAUNCHED!

Pages: 1 [2]  All

Author Topic: Announcing the Jelurida Public License  (Read 2695 times)

marenkar

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 154
  • Agavon
    • View Profile
    • TravinKeith.com
  • Karma: +67/-0

Just to be sure: if Jelurida wants to make a change of the code against the users (modify the supply, for example), then it is possible and legal to do a fork that keeps the original features? Will it be possible and legal to continue developing the code independently of Jelurida? Or will we be hijacked by the license?

From my understanding:

Yes.
Yes as long as either one of the conditions are met.
No, but all developments will be under the JPL license in the same manner that new developments on GPLv2 will be released as GPLv2. Maintaining that chain will be independent of Jelurida. However, that entity will not be able to license out the original Ardor code for private chain solutions as the IP of that still belongs to Jelurida.

tl;dr

 :P  ;D

TL;DR is at the bottom. The last two paragraphs give a general overview of my thoughts.

zuqka

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 327
    • View Profile
    • nxt.zuqka.info
  • Karma: +31/-4

+1440 to you all ;)
NXT-2V7G-C8BY-KTYY-CAHNU. Sponsoring 4 Full Nxt Nodes & demo.ardorplatform.org

d5000

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
  • Karma: +2/-0

Thank you for taking the time and comment, marenkar. I'll address most of your responses and try to explain why I'm still not convinced by the change to the JPL (or any other "shared source" license).

1) Cryptocurrencies still suffer from "pyramid scheme" and "scam" accusations. These accusations will be partly right if every clone has to provide benefits to the original stakeholders. These original holders will be an "untouchable elite". Do you really want that?
Regarding the pyramid scheme, or a ponzi (actually... somewhat both), that will always be there. This is going to be the case especially with 100% PoS platforms with no inflation. Early (respectively) participants will gain value with their investment, even if they do nothing but hold their coins, if more people join in.

You are partly right, although there are coins that are more often accused to be ponzis than others, and Ardor will be one of the most vulnerable to that accusation in my opinion, also because of the license that makes investors more heavy in the power balance.

Another problem is that a cryptocurrency that gives a higher benefit to early investors is probably much less usable and more volatile than others. Early investors would simply hold their coins as long as the price is going up - also to benefit from possible clones. That would have as a consequence that early investors would dominate the supply distribution for a long time, and that "coin supply" is small. That's not without risks, because early investors often have a large stash of coins and if they sell they can move the market significantly - e.g. if there is consensus that a bear market has begun. Also, pump-and-dump games would be common in a context of high volatility.

Quote
Regarding the "untouchable elite" comment, I don't really think so, especially with the 10% airdrop.

Most probably there will be very few clones, because it's simply too complicated to fullfill the requirements. That would satisfy the "tribal" fraction that regards clones as enemies, but for those like me that think that an "ecosystem" is important, it limits its growth. 

Quote
2) Cryptocurrencies are there to be used as currencies, not only as speculative assets. That license strengthens the "investment" aspect, not the currency aspect. That can limit its growth. Network effect is what has made Bitcoin larger than any other project.

I mention further below about the currency aspect and how the Ardor coin isn't a currency.  If you mean IGNIS though, then yes to some degree it's there since IGNIS has more currency traits [...]
Yes, that part refers more to IGNIS than to ARDR. And yes, I think IGNIS would very probably develop into the main currency "for usage" in the Ardor ecosystem.

Quote
I will argue though that it's the speculative investment aspect that really made Bitcoin take off, so Bitcoin isn't an ideal comparison since it's what's really caused the network effect to considerably grow.
Here I tend to disagree: The speculation in the Bitcoin case is largely based on the hope that Bitcoin at some day in the future will be a "global mainstream currency". That speculation has made it larger, that's right, but for the "currency story" to sustain itself there must be news linked to it, like the success of Bitpay, organizations and enterprises that accept Bitcoin, etc.. The speculation also has negative effects, like that it boosts volatility, and thus makes it less usable as a currency (above all, it's nearly useless as an "unit of account").



Quote
3) Bitcoin had many clones. Where are they now? The most important contender is actually Ethereum, a cryptocoin with a completely different source code.
[...] I disagree with your categorization with the clones of Bitcoin. While Smart Contract capabilities are possible with Bitcoin, I wouldn't consider Ethereum to be a clone of Bitcoin. If you categorize it that way, then Nxt itself is a clone of Bitcoin as well, with which I wouldn't agree.


I think you misinterpreted me here - I don't consider Ethereum and Nxt as "clones" but as competitors based on other code bases. The reason I mentioned Ethereum is because I think that Ardor - if successful - also will probably face competition from cryptocurrency projects that don't use its source code but take some of its ideas (e.g. child chains) and add other features (smart contracts are a good example because Ardor isn't to have turing-complete scripting capabilities).

A "worst case" scenario for Ardor investors would be a coin that implements the "child chain" concept without taking any source code from Ardor (in the same way Nxt took ideas from Bitcoin) - and releases it under a real open source license. In this case, I think Ardor will have really hard times - and I consider this scenario very likely if Ardor gets any real traction, e.g. becomes a top-10 cryptocurrency.

Ardor developers could try to patent some of the ideas in software-patent-friendly countries like the US, but in most other countries software patents are not granted nor protected, and a "patented cryptocurrency" in my opinion would be a complete PR fail and they would be considered "enemies of cryptocurrency" by most of the crypto-hacker/opensource-loving community. (I hope that this is NOT planned.)

Quote
You should see how many times I've had to argue with people within the Nxt community itself regarding clones of Nxt that comply with GPLv2 or platforms that are inspired by the code of Nxt. But, the crypto community is quite different from the open source community

I would differentiate here between a "core public" that are open-source loving crypto nerds, and a "secondary public" that got into cryptocurrencies just for the profits. The second case is what you're describing, they often are even explicitly pro-closed source because they don't understand the benefits of an open model, and I have also argued often with them (not only in the Nxt community, but also here, mainly at the beginning when Nxt was closed source). But it's the "core" - even if it's smaller in number - that has inmense value for a cryptocurrency project because these people can participate in development, bug reporting, testing, feature requests and so on. Ardor is likely to lose these people and won't get any new people on board if it goes proprietary.

Quote
All core developments are done by Jelurida and participation is not open like Bitcoin [..]

You're right. But I had hopes for that to change some day if Nxt/Ardor got more traction in the future and there would be more technically interested people inside the community, so development could be opened (and let e.g. alternative clients emerge). With the Jelurida license it's very unprobable that would change.

Quote
Anyway, my point is I don't think the license itself played a large role in the reason for their drop in price/use.

Bitshares' price is going up lately, in my opinion, because of the generalized altcoin bubble we're living now. But regarding to your point: That these projects have lost traction is in my opinion related to a centralized ecosystem with poor acceptance among developers and other technical-minded "crypto/open source nerds", so wrong decisions were taken (Bitshares' dilution policy, Steem's decision to centralize the project on a single website) and had no "checks and balances" (e.g. by healthy disagreement between some developer groups) that could have avoided these decisions.

Quote
If Jelurida introduces a new rule in the code that the community doesn't like, then they hard fork from there and use whatever balance snapshot they want from the last 3 months. I think the threat is still there for checks-and-balances.

This is a pretty soft threat, because the original holders would benefit financially from every clone, and the original Ignis or Ardor holders would continue to have influence in the project and could use that power to block changes that require unanimous or near-unanimous approval - you can see with Segwit in Bitcoin where that could lead.

Quote
Anyway, what I'm probably having a problem here is seeing a scenario where the forked chain during a hard fork would want to change the balances from that other than the past 3 months.

It would actually be a similar situation to that what Bitcoin lives actually with the Segwit/BU debate. The project which "forks away" would have to ensure that the holders from the other fraction wouldn't be granted influence in the project, as they could possibly sabotage it.



Quote
In what way do you see Ardor as a serious Bitcoin competitor? [...] If you mean as a currency, then I disagree. The Ardor coin (ARDR) is not meant to be used as a currency.
As already said, this "currency" would be probably IGNIS. Ardor could be a serious competitor, as already said, because it has similar or even superior scaling benefits than the "Extension block" proposal that in Bitcoin is still totally untested and would need at least a year more.

Quote
Bitcoin is a currency and is focused at being that. What brings value to Bitcoin is adoption as well as the speculation of adoption. There's no way to use Bitcoin without using the Bitcoin blockchain. With Nxt and Ardor, as well as these other blockchain 2.0 platforms, there is greater value with the code itself since the value of the coin comes from the use of the system and the speculated use of the system.

Sorry, I don't understand the difference here - Bitcoin's code has also some attributes that are "valuable", e.g. their focus on security.

Regarding to development funding, for me it's clear that a system with a higher adoption and a larger ecosystem will also get more donations. Nxt had the problem that it lived a bit "in the shadows" of Ethereum and other coins that were the "vedette" of the moment in the past two years, but I think that will change a lot if Ardor can play with its scaling USP. Openness will benefit fundraising too, I think.

Quote
With crypto, it's a bit different and new. While open source projects in the past had pretty much just the contributors as the stakeholders, cryptocurrency projects have another stakeholder introduced - the coin holders. [...] If the coins were given freely and had no monetary value, then they wouldn't mind that other coins were being made elsewhere. But that's not the case, and a lot of times, it's not spare change either. [...] With this, the current open source licenses don't really protect the users as much as I'd like as well.

This is only valid if you think that clones affect the value of a cryptocurrency only because of their existence. In my opinion, that's not the case. In the few cases I know when a clone affected or "surpassed in value" the original cryptocurrency there were more reasons for that:
- the Nxt/Waves case: a community split from which the clone coin could attract some capital and network effect from the original community. (ETH/ETC is probably a little bit similar)
- the Tenebrix/Litecoin case: a cryptocurrency (Tenebrix) whose distribution was regarded as unfair and a fairer project got nearly all users,
- the Peercoin/Emercoin case: a cryptocurrency (Peercoin) where development had been stalled, while another team (the Emercon team) updated the code and added features.
- the Crypti/Lisk case: was largely the same that the Peercoin/Emercoin case.

If you know other cases where the simple existence of a clone had affected the value of a coin, feel free to mention them here.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2017, 03:08:28 am by d5000 »

galeki

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
    • View Profile
  • Karma: +15/-2

Maybe let them choose, from min 0% to max 10%, more like a donation would be better.

Megalodon

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
  • Karma: +32/-0

I wish Jelurida would use Nxt voting for such a major decision, and undertake to abide by stakeholder's vote.
Any other party putting up a vote would be pointless, as the result may not be respected.
Help secure the Nxt blockchain by forging with your NXT and be in the game to win part of the 5M NXT forging bounty!

Jimmy2011

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 328
    • View Profile
  • Karma: +24/-19


It's my 2 nxt:

Nxt is too great, so ppl can't do something in the industry. It seems that the project is successful if and only if it can bring a lot of startups and form a full industry from the upstream to the downstream. The bitcoin chips, miners, pools, to wallets, exchanges and so on. Ethereum, from the platform for coders to companies for applications. So what about Nxt? Apart from so many assets, what others based on Nxt? And even assets, there are too many scam assets. Nxt has so many great functionalities, from alias names, markets, coin builder to assets, and many many. Too many. We need to do subtraction, the core just need to do the core. Please let those startups do something around Nxt, Ardor, so they can earn something and grow up, and Nxt, Ardor will also grow up. Don't do everything for the ppl. Just do the core. Let those corporations do something, and come to the core for guide. Don't feed them. They will come over to the core.



NXT-LX5G-L63N-ST8S-9LVZY

Riker

  • Core Dev
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1705
    • View Profile
  • Karma: +429/-42


It's my 2 nxt:

Nxt is too great, so ppl can't do something in the industry. It seems that the project is successful if and only if it can bring a lot of startups and form a full industry from the upstream to the downstream. The bitcoin chips, miners, pools, to wallets, exchanges and so on. Ethereum, from the platform for coders to companies for applications. So what about Nxt? Apart from so many assets, what others based on Nxt? And even assets, there are too many scam assets. Nxt has so many great functionalities, from alias names, markets, coin builder to assets, and many many. Too many. We need to do subtraction, the core just need to do the core. Please let those startups do something around Nxt, Ardor, so they can earn something and grow up, and Nxt, Ardor will also grow up. Don't do everything for the ppl. Just do the core. Let those corporations do something, and come to the core for guide. Don't feed them. They will come over to the core.

Right, therefore we provide public API for every core function and use these APIs ourselves to develop the NXT wallet.
There are some things that should be left for the core team like multisig for example https://news.bitcoin.com/ethereums-parity-client-users-lose-millions-multi-sig-hack/
NXT Core Dev
Account: NXT-HBFW-X8TE-WXPW-DZFAG
Public Key: D8311651 Key fingerprint: 0560 443B 035C EE08 0EC0  D2DD 275E 94A7 D831 1651

apenzl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2470
    • View Profile
    • Nxter.org
  • Karma: +241/-10

https://www.jelurida.com/jelurida-public-license has been updated and IGNIS is no longer mentioned.

Can Jelurida please confirm that if Ardor is cloned IGNIS holders should get a sharedrop of 10% of the clone's forging tokens?

Quote
3.4.1
The token holders from the original distributed ledger instance are allocated a portion (a sharedrop) of the tokens in that new DLT Instance proportional to their token balances. This shall also apply to anyone who intends to make a copy of your copy, i. e. any such person needs to allocate the same sharedrop of the newly created tokens to the account holders from the original DLT Instance (not to your copy). If the Covered Work is not a DLT Software per se this requirement still applies to any other work based on or including this work or portions of it which is a DLT Software or in any other way distributes tokens to its users. The specific percentage of the sharedrop and the tokens to which it applies, which may also depend on how the new DLT Instance relates to the original one, are defined in the Special Conditions.

xcn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 253
    • View Profile
  • Karma: +22/-4

https://www.jelurida.com/jelurida-public-license has been updated and IGNIS is no longer mentioned.

Can Jelurida please confirm that if Ardor is cloned IGNIS holders should get a sharedrop of 10% of the clone's forging tokens?

Quote
3.4.1
The token holders from the original distributed ledger instance are allocated a portion (a sharedrop) of the tokens in that new DLT Instance proportional to their token balances. This shall also apply to anyone who intends to make a copy of your copy, i. e. any such person needs to allocate the same sharedrop of the newly created tokens to the account holders from the original DLT Instance (not to your copy). If the Covered Work is not a DLT Software per se this requirement still applies to any other work based on or including this work or portions of it which is a DLT Software or in any other way distributes tokens to its users. The specific percentage of the sharedrop and the tokens to which it applies, which may also depend on how the new DLT Instance relates to the original one, are defined in the Special Conditions.



Seems like this JPL can easily be a subject to change by the team without any announcement. Thats very bad.
What's the legal status of this JPL?

MadCow

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
    • View Profile
  • Karma: +17/-0

https://www.jelurida.com/jelurida-public-license has been updated and IGNIS is no longer mentioned.

Can Jelurida please confirm that if Ardor is cloned IGNIS holders should get a sharedrop of 10% of the clone's forging tokens?

Quote
3.4.1
The token holders from the original distributed ledger instance are allocated a portion (a sharedrop) of the tokens in that new DLT Instance proportional to their token balances. This shall also apply to anyone who intends to make a copy of your copy, i. e. any such person needs to allocate the same sharedrop of the newly created tokens to the account holders from the original DLT Instance (not to your copy). If the Covered Work is not a DLT Software per se this requirement still applies to any other work based on or including this work or portions of it which is a DLT Software or in any other way distributes tokens to its users. The specific percentage of the sharedrop and the tokens to which it applies, which may also depend on how the new DLT Instance relates to the original one, are defined in the Special Conditions.

Can this be confirmed, do 10% clone sharedrops go to NXT or Ignis?
Pages: 1 [2]  All