Replies (124)
DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞
Trademarks are a fuck if you do, fuck if you don't type of law.
Was not an easy decision, but had to be made. I own it.
If you don't defend it, you lose it.
And If someone made an evil version of our products we would have less recourse.
Running your sales site of your knock off out of the same repository as your codebase is retarded. Trademark has nothing to do with the code.
Things are never as simple as the cancel ppl try to make it be.
The drama seems to always originate from the same sources...
View quoted note →
Cool story bro, fuck off.
I had to do it too. Not a trademark but a patent.
The process is exhausting when you do it yourself without a lawyer. I definitely felt like I had to defend my design. Got it done tho. I own my creation as well and it was worth it once the process was finalized with a patent number. 🤙🏼
🫂
I like all the work you do, but I've only heard context about this through the rumor mill. Was someone selling a "blockclock" and essentially taking the name you've built? I find it hard to believe you have a problem with an open-source build of the idea of a blockclock.
Can you provide some more context?
The block clock sucks. Not a single smart person would pay for such an item. You made some money selling stupid shit to idiots(we all do this) so take the win and let it go. Bat now you'll be remembered as a douche, which you are... So I guess it works out actually... Nevermind
the way you are supposed to compete is making a better product and/or a cheaper one. A clone cant damage your sells if its a bad clone. A good clone, better than the original, would.
You have based the success of your company selling hws to a niche that understand the quality and the value of products, noone will benefit by your bad fiat move, noone needed this paternalistic intervention except you. The same people that appreciated and respected coinkite are the same that could loose their respect after a move like that, you know, bitcoiners love free markets and fair competition.
I thought it was cool until I saw the price. Then, I didn't think is was cool.
Such anger
still got my support. Great products
Please fix the wifi (wpa2/3 support) as I upgraded security and now my Blockclock mini doesn’t work anymore whilst my BTClock does 👀
Would you be willing, for the good of the project, to step down from OpenSats Board?
That's hardware limitation, waiting on new module form expressif
What is this emoji? I always assumed it was a movie camera but how does that make sense in this context?
It's two people hugging.
Thanks. Would never have guessed that in a million years.
You have to stare at it like those stereogram pictures at the mall.
Ha. Haven’t seen one of those for years. What a weird craze that was.
What project?
OpenSats
I’m out of the loop here. What’s the 🍵?
Why would him stepping down be for the good of the OpenSats? How is this related to OpenSats?
Was this done cold, or did you communicate the issue prior to involving lawyers?
@DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞 sits on the 9 member board that determines what projects are funded by the organization. There is a growing view that Bitcoin projects are not being funded by OpenSats due to conflicts of interests from board members. Regardless if NVK is abstaining or not, his presence on the board only leads to concerns from members of the Bitcoin community. There are very qualified members of the community that could provide the technical guidance to the Board's decisions that are not nearly in a level of conflict that NVK brings.
I was one of the few people who was able to see the sailboat within just a few seconds. I could even see it as I was walking past. Lol
Opensats is losing credibility and thereby donations with him on the board, which hurts the greater FOSS community upon which Bitcoin is built.
Some of my personal favorite FOSS projects are clearly discriminated against by the Opensats board.
The "Bitcoin community" should start it's own non-profit to pay devs. Especially if there are very qualified members. OpenSats is an organization. Organizations are not decentralized. They are centrally controlled. If you don't like Open Sats because you don't like 11.1111% of the board, I would consider donating to a different non-profit.
I understand your concern but your recommendation sounds entitled and irrational.
My mental image of you now is someone who is permanently cross eyed 😂
The trick is to blur your eyes and stare into the picture. Almost like you're looking through it.
He is 11% of the board. Any other board members with issues?
You understand the concern so what would be the right way to address it for the good of OpenSats and the existing donation base it has?
I don't know because I don't run Open Sats. But even with NVK excluded, I trust the rest of the board and Gigi.
Conflicts of interests, absolutely.
In the name of transparency you should probably disclose your business relationship causing your own personal bias here.
I have no dog in this fight. Only interested in FOSS, which is what Opensats is supposed to be supporting.
No one has worked harder to obfuscate the definition of FOSS.
I don't either but I can certainly see how this will affect funding for the organization in total. I hope
@Gigi would consider these calls from many members of the Bitcoin community and at least call a special meeting per Art III, Section 7 to allow board members to make that decision on an individual personal level. I also trust mayn of the other board members and would hope they'd do the right thing for the organization.
From a long time Coinkite supporter and BlockClock owner. You are acting like you have nothing to do with the open source community and not actively benefiting from it. Why did you not contact him first to change the name? How can you do this and not step down from
@OpenSats board?
Please name the conflicts and total the % of the board that share the same or similar conflicts.
I bought a grip of cold cards as a reseller. They're my slowest moving product and I should bought Bitcoin instead. I've also receive Open Sats funding for Q4 2023.
Not sure how that plays into a bias here. I think NVK shouldn't sue OSS devs. I also think he's fine to stay on Open Sats board.
RE: obfuscation
Have you seen the Operation Orchestra video?
If funding is affected then board seats will be more likely to change. My guess is the outraged individuals are not primary funding sources and will have little impact on the org.
But the simple thing here is this. Trademarks and all other form of IP are an indefensible postion. When someone creates a thing of a new paradigm the first mover is the one everyone learns of first. So inherently that name whatever it may be is by necessity what people will call it. Kleenx & coke are some great examples. Everyone refers to these trademarks AS THE THING all the time when referring to the thing. Using the state to forcibly make others not use a similar name is just retarded and makes you look weak.
DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞
Trademarks are a fuck if you do, fuck if you don't type of law.
Was not an easy decision, but had to be made. I own it.
If you don't defend it, you lose it.
And If someone made an evil version of our products we would have less recourse.
Running your sales site of your knock off out of the same repository as your codebase is retarded. Trademark has nothing to do with the code.
Things are never as simple as the cancel ppl try to make it be.
The drama seems to always originate from the same sources...
View quoted note →
Let's say
@DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞 is hostile to anyone opposing his business moat when they apply to
@OpenSats.
Which 4 other board members share the same interest that enables this bias?
Let's be specific and name names. They are all publicly listed. The easiest is
@ODELL since he's invested in CoinKite.
Who are the other 3 and why would they be biased?
No clue what this is about but team NVK all the way.
I WAS DONE WITH COINKITE AFTER THEY TOOK PREORDERS ON A PRODUCT THEY FAILED TO DELIVER & THEN KEPT EVERYONE'S FUCKING BTC DEPOSITS AND INSTEAD REFUNDED PPL BACK W/ THE SHITCOIN THAT IS STORE CREDIT. FUCK NVK THAT CHEAP FUCK
intellectual property is a legal fiction
Someone called the based department because this guy is getting a promotion 🏅
Sounds awful, indeed.
From a business perspective in normie world this position is understandable and quite common.
In the context of open source driven bitcoin and bitcoiners who supported your products and helped you build the company this move seems a bit odd. Don't know the numbers but likely the blockclock isn't your cash cow.
Also coldcards are not simple in UX and seems more for technical users / enthusiast audience, which is the user base that likely don't agree with that agressive move. Also free market and competition yada, yada ethos.
If it's not the cash cow and backbone of the company then a softer approach like just asking to rename to avoid confusion would have been the better approach, imho. This could cost more coldcard revenue than the precedent it hoped to set for possible future "evil" blockclock copy cats.
That said, much respect for the company you built and what you do for the space - just disagree how that was handled in the context of our small ecosystem and your target audience.
View quoted note →Why are you so defensive towards NVK's position on the Board? If something is only 89% as good as it could be and we both can understand the community's concerns, why would improving it be so contentious?
Additionally NVK doesn't need to vote to have a chilling effect. He can make his false accusations against project's merits before abstaining as he's done numerous times in public. This chilling effect is not needed and could be improved with a less troll candidate.
Before naming names, is there a way I can look at voting records or secretary recorded discussions from subcommittees? As you've stated I don't have insider knowledge of how OpenSats is being operated but I can certainly see how others are perceiving their operations and thus my concerns. If I can research that then I'd be happy to include names.
Looking at what is posted in public meeting notes gives me concern without having to look into subcommittee records. This is from the 2024 Q2 Minutes:
18:55 — NVK briefly proposes that we add artificial intelligence (AI) as a category of projects that we fund. He has domain expert in AI who can set up a subcommittee for applications related to AI. Since this is currently a very trendy area that might overwhelm our processing if it gets attention, he suggests that we make it low-key. Janine points out that we are probably required to publicly announce this, otherwise the fairness of the offering could be challenged.
Why does
@npub1d3g6...pr09 have to remind NVK to keep applications for funds fair?
That’s a fair take. Fiction or not, the challenge was the was the real reward.
Great example of how a 9 person board can keep one person in check to maintain the integrity of the org. Thank you for proving my point.
Why would you want someone like that on the board in the first place?
Clearly you have not listened to Bitcoin.Review
Is there a particular episode in reference or just flat hero worship?
Now we're entering ad hominem area. Go fuck yourself and do better.
I'll assume by the response it was the latter
You're winning so hard. Keep it up.
We're all losing if the mission is compromised by those who seek to empower themselves over the mission.
"I can't justify my position so I'll just assume it's hero worship"
Circle back to the original argument and make the case for it. You assert NVK on the board is bad but could only find one instance of potential malfeasance that was put in check by another board member. Highlighting how robust a 9 person board is at keep things clean. Then you ignore a very clear track record of technical understanding (probably good for a board member to have) and call it hero worship.
So again. Go fuck yourself.
Who is "we"?
I'm winning.
I'm also muting you now.
As I asked before can you point me to where I can read additional minutes of subcommittee and decision votes? How would I attempt to provide clear examples if I don't have the documents to prove such things. I can only point to what I have access to.
I take away a differing opinion on this one instance of public minutes showing that NVK attempts to do things that subvert fairness. If someone only does one bad thing do they not deserve reprocussions? Besides I smell lots of smoke and all know where there's smoke, theres fire.
Again NVK may be technical but there are many other technical people that can provide guideance without compromising principles.
Fortunately you can't hide my comments from others to see and make judgements for themselves. I wish you all the best.
I'm not neutral in this as I personally know and respect Djuri (BTClock) well, but can you imagine BitPay taking down the repository of BTCPay server?
View quoted note →That literally what was said earlier. "They lose donations with him on the board." Meaning people ARE not donating if they don't like 11% of the board. The request to step down is a suggestion for Opensats, not you.
Poeple should understand what a "majority vote" means.
That process is irrelevant to stepping down, which was the suggestion.
It's a retarded suggestion that lacks understand of how the org works.
As it is to be a simp for someone with a track record of being a bad actor in the FOSS space.
You confuse simping with disagreeing. To be clear, NVK is a douchebag for suing an open source dev. However, that doesn't mean he's a bad board member for OpenSats (which is an unpaid position).
Please address the following or fuck off. I'm tired of repeating myself.
View quoted note →
chicken
Let's say
@DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞 is hostile to anyone opposing his business moat when they apply to
@OpenSats.
Which 4 other board members share the same interest that enables this bias?
Let's be specific and name names. They are all publicly listed. The easiest is
@ODELL since he's invested in CoinKite.
Who are the other 3 and why would they be biased?
You're a simp. I'm not engaging in your gaslighting.
Everytime you've pointed the finger here three have been pointing back at you.
People can have bad days. That was last night. You doubled down this morning. Showing who you really are. It's sad to see. Enjoy your bed with NVK. I'm out.
The contention is not that his vote would weigh more than others. The issue brought up is that FOSS is a mindset diametrically opposed to copyright. To be on a board promoting and funding FOSS projects has a responsibility to be objective. The conflict of interest involved with making copyright claims on a FOSS project because it seems to "Infringe" on one's own product leads one to think: If one 9th of the board is compromised ethically, I have an 11% chance of my donations being squandered by passing up projects "Too close" to projects NVK might have an interest in. This is not retarded or irrational. I don't care about Opensats myself as I give charity only to people I know personally. This is merely an explanation of where others are coming from.
It's majority voting.
chicken
Let's say
@DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞 is hostile to anyone opposing his business moat when they apply to
@OpenSats.
Which 4 other board members share the same interest that enables this bias?
Let's be specific and name names. They are all publicly listed. The easiest is
@ODELL since he's invested in CoinKite.
Who are the other 3 and why would they be biased?
OK.
Don't forget a core piece of this whole issue, GitHub. If the code were hosted in a non-centralized, we would all just laugh at NVK and move on. The only reason there's an impact to BTCLOCK is the code repos are gone.
Are you really attempting to blame
@Djuri for this now based on where he's storing code?
After rereading I'll give the benefit of the doubt that this was intended at a deeper level against GitHub but please stop with the cope. GitHub isn't to blame here either since they were forced to take the action based on NVK placing the complaint.
Shit. Guess I am a former customer of Coinkite
DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞
Trademarks are a fuck if you do, fuck if you don't type of law.
Was not an easy decision, but had to be made. I own it.
If you don't defend it, you lose it.
And If someone made an evil version of our products we would have less recourse.
Running your sales site of your knock off out of the same repository as your codebase is retarded. Trademark has nothing to do with the code.
Things are never as simple as the cancel ppl try to make it be.
The drama seems to always originate from the same sources...
View quoted note →
Imagine two people building a computer! Learn from the past.
Stop feeding lawyers.
Must we fight each other at this stage already?
DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞
Trademarks are a fuck if you do, fuck if you don't type of law.
Was not an easy decision, but had to be made. I own it.
If you don't defend it, you lose it.
And If someone made an evil version of our products we would have less recourse.
Running your sales site of your knock off out of the same repository as your codebase is retarded. Trademark has nothing to do with the code.
Things are never as simple as the cancel ppl try to make it be.
The drama seems to always originate from the same sources...
View quoted note →
Dude are you really gonna hit em with a gO bUiLd It yourself note? How about you go fuck yourself. NVK and ODELL are both conflicts of interest when it comes to opensats and this BTClock bullshit is a prime example.
Wake up call if you build something and put it out in the public, people have the right to criticize your product or service and if you don’t like it fuck you.
💥
chicken
Let's say
@DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞 is hostile to anyone opposing his business moat when they apply to
@OpenSats.
Which 4 other board members share the same interest that enables this bias?
Let's be specific and name names. They are all publicly listed. The easiest is
@ODELL since he's invested in CoinKite.
Who are the other 3 and why would they be biased?
No fuck off with that, you can’t have the best intentions for a non profit when you have a fiduciary responsibility to your investors. That means Odell could have legal recourse if he were to fund a competing 1031 company same for NVK if he were to vote in favor of a competing coinkite company.
This is a conflict of interest and not some made up conspiracy theory.
GiGi needs to grow some fucking balls make a statement and let these guys go.
Still waiting for how malfeasance happens for the 7 other board members.
How about free cold cards and hush corn
I could come up with a million reasons but that doesn’t stop the simple fact that there is a conflict of interest.
By the way wipe that NVK jizz off your face
Your supporting BTClock, right?
Yeah I get that.
there are other challenges.
how about donating directly to devs?
Like this?
I’m still going to recommend Coldcard to new Bitcoiners. And I’m still going to sue my Coldcard.
Streisand effect
Imo defending the name "Blockclock" goes against the ethos of decentralization and openness that Bitcoin and Nostr embody. Satoshi never trademarked Bitcoin, and Fiatjaf left Nostr open for all. Their choice inspired trust, innovation, and growth to me.
Instead of claiming ownership, let’s embrace the spirit of abundance. Share ideas, not restrictions. Build together, not behind walls. That’s how we move forward.
Bitcoin didn’t succeed by limiting use. Neither will we. Let’s free opensource everything and create a world where ideas thrive freely 🙏🤗
#Nostr #Bitcoin #OpenSource #foss #OpenSourceEverything
I don't know why you wrote this. I know that, as I wrote, that is not the contention. Again, it is the mindset around FOSS and intellectual property when being on a board that awards donations to FOSS projects.
Think about it this way: If someone was on the board for distribution of funds towards technological advancement but they were Amish. You might have a conflict of interest there right? But just one Amish person on the board doesn't sway the vote. They just don't have the requisite mindset for the position. Do you see my point?
If the Amish person has hours of recorded conversation that demonstrates a clear understanding of FOSS, I'd say send it
This is not the way. Your reputation is and was far more important than this petty squabble, and it is being tarnished by this action.
You will regret attacking the ethos of the community who supported you.
Imagine Satoshi going after every altcoin created.
Half the stuff you use everyday are knockoffs of another product.
I would feel flattered if people copied my idea or product, especially in a an environment that embraces openness.
Could have at least contacted the person just to see if you could cooperate towards a new product. Or copy whatever they are doing better to improve your own product.
That hat is made by ppl with a trade mark on their brand too.
I feel like I am not being clear. Understanding is not the issue, either. I UNDERSTAND war-mongers, thieves, and globalist control fiends. I am just ideologically opposed to them. Like the Amish to technology in my example or NVK and and FOSS in real life.
Sorry, not sorry. I’m grateful to NVK and Coinkite for providing solid products and not skimping on security. All these attacks on NVK just seem like an attempt to smear and create division. I will continue to buy Coinkite products and recommend them to others.
Same. Any issues need sorting obviously but consistently strong products
Amen
The knock-off block clock is a joke because it's just a shitty copy with effectively no innovation.
... now my PlebClock is technically superior in every way but that's another topic. Also, remember when you said you wouldn't sue me? 😅 thx
lol telling
@DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞 to fuck off is beta. You can hate on the guy all you want but you have to recognize him for what he is - the de-facto standard for secure hardware design. Also the block clock is dope but idk if you own one otherwise you'd know that.
Cope harder.
Never apologize to commies
Hardware wallets are a scam, and will never be as secure as
@SeedSigner or a #grapheneOS device. But go ahead, keep on wasting your sats on them bro, keep on funding and supporting for-profit company's who bully open source developers, NVK thanks you.
Does the design of the btc lock use the exact same code and circuit design as yours?
Sorry mate, but with this move nobody is winning. It doesn’t the ethos we all support.
*Doesn’t fit
Agreed. The bro is doing something rather than nothing. Makes a signing device which I choose to buy because it gets a job done. Yes, there's others, and it's good to have choice. I didn't have to buy a coldcard but I did. When I need a new signing device I'll go to market and see what's available.
Can someone explain what could Coinkite have lost by doin nothing and just keeping building better products , or shaming the competition with memes for their cheap copies and a of the blockclock and their lack of morality ?
what exactly is the trademark though
the simple word "blockclock" cannot be trademarked neither can "coca-cola" or "microsoft" and for which reason the actual trademark is their distinctive way of writing that thing
if they ripped off the actual logotype then ok, but if they just ripped off "blockclock" then sorry, you are wrong
what matters and only matters here, is did they copy the logo
everything else is irrelevant
also, i see no problem with you pulling their website from your own domain, that's also completely fair play
what size shoe r U wearing?
Looks like NVK made a judgment call and took some heat. From what I’ve seen, it might not have been the best move, but who’s to say?
That said, NVK took a clear stance defending against a drivechain fork, which was very beneficial for Bitcoin. There will be moments when taking a stand will be needed, and I am hopeful NVK will get the big calls right.
Perhaps it’s worth giving him the benefit of the doubt this time.
Did you defend it? Or did you summonl a bunch of professional extortionists goons with guns to defend it on your behalf?
This case could be solve without any Government intervention.
This reminds me of the low transfer limits at
@Cash App — against the ethos of Bitcoin
NVK clearly indicates the trademark he is protecting is for "blockclock" by boosting the following post.
NVK implies he is using his trademark claim to protect his sales of his luxury-priced BLOCKCLOCK. This does not appear to be a valid a trademark or copyright claim.
View quoted note →
View quoted note →
This can be publically resolved with the simple gesture of publishing the actual takedown request sent to github. If NVK holds a trademark for BTCclock, then he has a positive legal right established in law by means of the monopoly of the use of force and people with guns and cages. If NVK only holds a trademark for BLOCKCLOCK, and he does not publish the takedown request, then we can assume he is standing behind the 5th amendment.
Brett Phillips
People really like to misunderstand the “ethos” of open source as some hippy utopia ideal. You clearly ripped off the block clock, which may not have been your intention but is clear nonetheless. Having legal action against you is purely the business protecting itself and if the situations/timelines were reversed, you’d be doing the same, or you’re dumb (clearly not given the proof of work).
Sounds like you started a competition and then got butt hurt when your competition fought back.
I use to love nostr and now it feels like I just come online to a bunch of whiney bitches complaining.
@nvk your clock is too expensive.
View quoted note →
Yet we all get pissed with all the Bitcoin knockoffs.. Bch etc etc
Lol
NOTICE IT'S 🦗🦗🦗 FROM THE BUSINESS OWNER BECAUSE HE KNOWS HE PRACTICES ARE SHIT
