pull down to refresh
But, of course, none of that really matters, if this is ends up becoming true:
Incorrect, open source on release.
Does this mean open source like MIT or open source like Umbrel?
Like Umbrel, it's not FOSS.
well that's no bueno
Why do you say that? Do you intend on actually modifying the source code?
It doesn't matter if he does or doesn't. FOSS is core to the ethos of Bitcoin. Anyone should be free to do whatever they want with the software, even if that means they can build their own business from it.
The best analogy I've come up with is relating it to censoring transactions. Even if you knew your transactions wouldn't be censored, you wouldn't be okay with a miner that chose to censor other's transactions.
So even if you wouldn't modify the code yourself, you shouldn't be okay with having the freedom of others bring limited from doing so who could.
deleted by author
deleted by author
deleted by author
deleted by author
deleted by author
deleted by author
deleted by author
So,,.... looks like there's some more things to look into though:
view on twitter.comThen read this thread:
Thread by @GhostOfNakadai on Thread Reader App https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1510325379004866564.html