you always have the opportunity to deploy a competitor which takes the opposite approach and requires wide consensus before anything changes.
No you don't, the license forbids it.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
you always have the opportunity to deploy a competitor which takes the opposite approach and requires wide consensus before anything changes.
No you don't, the license forbids it.
The license forbids you to create your own blockchains? Pretty impressive license!
The context of the above comment implied using the original code with a different blockchain or a fork, which the license indeed forbids
Oops, I glanced over the P2P part not realizing he meant the steem blockchain.
This will probably hang over us until it's tested in court. For the good of the community, maybe you should deploy one and invite Dan to sue you? Better now than 10 years from now.
Nice of you to volunteer me. How about the novel approach of volunteering yourself?
@smooth I imagine you can more afford it than I.
It was a joke, of course. You are right to highlight it and put pressure on them to remove the ambiguity.
Its very very unlikely that the founders would be willing to risk a lawsuit to stop a renegade blockchain, even if they could figure out who deployed it (which i feel like it would be tough).
Theyre playing way too close to the edge to risk that. Especially with things like peerplays.
Obviously the best person to do it would be Satoshi Nakamoto as with his 1 million BTC he can bury Dan and Ned under a mountain of lawyers.