Thread

Fascinating. Like the cold card being a dumb terminal to a better UX?

nostr:nprofile1qqs9v9et20mnqagtgrnrc5qmzcrgmkt2y3087p23vawqlmyczlhfdcqprdmhxue69uhkvet9v3ejumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtmsd93hxqg7waehxw309ahx7um5wgh8xetvvckkget5v4ex66twv4jzuer9c822gk - There is no second best.

What dont people like about coinkite?

2 things 1) The way they attack competitors. 2) The fact that they use government protection on their code. I don't know exactly the name but from what I understand the code is open source but if you were to create your own device with that code AND sell it for profit you could. In theory, be in trouble. But imo the second one is a protection against big corporations not the little guy. I mean. If someone had the balls he could just sell his own coldcards here under a nym.

Cold Card is an amazing HW Wallet.

The license draws no distinction between who is and isn't permitted to sell the software (big or otherwise). My biggest issue with it is the reliance on the company. Such a license is a disincentive for someone else to improve their code because it's for profit and the developers can't sell the improved version. In my opinion, this probably reduces the resources that would otherwise go into the code base, even if they came from a competitor. They could also be bought out (or somehow taken over) and leave us all as bag holders if the new company decided to abandon or taint the software somehow. A competitor couldn't step in and sell us a better version. They aren't the only ones with such a model and they are more open than many other products and services. I think the problem people have is that they use the "open source" battle cry when, historically, that's meant FOSS. Some people have tried to change that culture and there's natural resistance. They should call it "source available" because that's what it actually is culturally. I understand WHY they did this, but it's antithetical to FOSS (what most think of as open source) and I would have no interest in contributing to a for profit (I have no issue with profit) codebase (as an unpaid "open source" contributor) that I'm not allowed to sell myself. I think more people would work on it if that wasn't the case, but that's speculation. They chose to get pissed at people for doing what their own license permitted. As for the hardware, I've had two different models fail within a year of purchase. I've used some of their competitors (those they've attacked) products without issue for years. The company, or at least some people in it, have piss poor attitudes that many people don't like. I've found myself in that boat as a former customer. Their support team is great though. They sent new devices. I want to be fair here. Something like nostr:nprofile1qqs09jtvjlmyrxjn37zv70a89csegcz7rpyqjmnw29cveedhv7vagqqpzemhxue69uhk2er9dchxummnw3ezumrpdejz7qg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t09uq3zamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0x9u2rf , although imperfect, embodies the Bitcoin and open source ethos much better, in my opinion.

And to be extra clear, I understand that some large companies benefit from FOSS without giving much back. That is shitty and I'm not defending that culture here. But I don't think you can have it both ways and taking the restrictive license approach as an alleged anarchist is particularly goofy.

Yeah he's an anarchist. That part is larping from him.

I'm not an anarchist, but I also don't pretend to be one. I actually agree with FOSS being voluntary and he should be free to license it however he wants within a legal framework. This clearly highlights my primary argument against anarchy. But that's a whole other topic. I just think it's goofy that he claims to be this big crypto anarchist and then uses government.

And I say all this with respect for what he's built. The products are very cool.

> Something like @SeedSigner , although imperfect, embodies the Bitcoin and open source ethos much better, in my opinion. 🫶