[ESHOP launched] Trezor: Bitcoin hardware wallet - page 83.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: Totscha on January 29, 2015, 05:23:59 AM

2. 2 wrongs makes a right was not my point. My point was that the Chinese have no respect for copyright.

lol, you just did it again right there

Quote from: Totscha on January 29, 2015, 05:23:59 AM

3. With all that said. If it turns out they did backdate the licensing, that is a pretty deceptive move on their part. Meaning that in all fairness they should use LGPL for the 1.3 firmware source.

Apparently: They decided they'd made a mistake with the licensing, and chose to use deception to backdate it, then lied about it publicly. This makes their ethics no better than those that are attempting to profit from their work. That sort of behaviour does not deserve any kind of reward or promotion.

Totscha

hero member

Activity: 1276

Merit: 622

Quote from: Carlton Banks on January 29, 2015, 04:58:49 AM

Quote from: Totscha on January 29, 2015, 04:50:23 AM

I don't think people understand what closed source actually is. Hint: the source is not published publicly on Git.

You're wrong, this is not free software. That's what the customers bought into, and that's what they should be receiving. Making semantic arguments is not appropriate here; "free" and "open" are not used literally in a software development context.

Quote from: Totscha on January 29, 2015, 04:50:23 AM

This only hurts the copy cats, the rest of us still have a hardware wallet with open-source software. And I'm also pretty sure it's not gonna stop the Chinese anyway...

You're advocating the "2 wrongs make a right" approach. And you're correct: this will not stop a successful copycat anyway. It will stop me buying the "official" device.

1. Exactly. The software is open but not free for anyone to copy and use in their device for sale. I have no problems with that. They want to make money from their hard work.

2. 2 wrongs makes a right was not my point. My point was that the Chinese have no respect for copyright.

3. With all that said. If it turns out they did backdate the licensing, that is a pretty deceptive move on their part. Meaning that in all fairness they should use LGPL for the 1.3 firmware source.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: Totscha on January 29, 2015, 04:50:23 AM

I don't think people understand what closed source actually is. Hint: the source is not published publicly on Git.

You're wrong, this is not free software. That's what the customers bought into, and that's what they should be receiving. Making semantic arguments is not appropriate here; "free" and "open" are not used literally in a software development context.

Quote from: Totscha on January 29, 2015, 04:50:23 AM

This only hurts the copy cats, the rest of us still have a hardware wallet with open-source software. And I'm also pretty sure it's not gonna stop the Chinese anyway...

You're advocating the "2 wrongs make a right" approach. And you're correct: this will not stop a successful copycat anyway. It will stop me buying the "official" device.

Totscha

hero member

Activity: 1276

Merit: 622

Quote from: Carlton Banks on January 29, 2015, 03:58:18 AM

I would never buy a cheap clone of their device.

And I would never buy a device with closed source IP.

Bye bye Trezor. Bad decision.

I don't think people understand what closed source actually is. Hint: the source is not published publicly on Git.

The software is still open-source. Anyone can check the source an compile it by themselves. You can freely use it and copy it. It publicly published, for gods sake! Anyone can play around with it and see how it works. That's why it's there. Why put/keep it on Git if we can't even look?

You just can't distribute/sell it as your own (in your hardware product). Pretty sure you could make a deal for a paid license, but no freebies.

This only hurts the copy cats, the rest of us still have a hardware wallet with open-source software. And I'm also pretty sure it's not gonna stop the Chinese anyway...

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

I would never buy a cheap clone of their device.

And I would never buy a device with closed source IP.

Bye bye Trezor. Bad decision.

2586

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 13

What's the deal with this?:

Trezor Code no Longer LGPLv3, but now more restrictive Microsoft Reference Source License

I bought my Trezor with the understanding that all of the code running on it was open source (Free/Libre/etc), and would continue to be.

If the code is going to be under a restrictive license going forward, I am no longer interested in owning a Trezor; I request that SatoshiLabs allow me to return mine for a refund, in order to make up for the bait-and-switch.

kkurtmann

sr. member

Activity: 475

Merit: 250

Quote from: binford on January 28, 2015, 10:55:05 PM

Quote from: kkurtmann on January 28, 2015, 07:49:51 PM

would satoshilabs be willing to sell me a First Edition metal Trezor for 1.0 BTC ?

try at least tree fiddy

wait a week

grau

hero member

Activity: 836

Merit: 1030

bits of proof

Quote from: grau on January 27, 2015, 01:01:52 PM

You likely noticed significant improvement of performce while myTREZOR retrieves balances.
The reason is an upgrade of the back end. Have fun.

I waited some time to be able to claim increased stability too.
There was not a single minute of disruption in service for nearly two weeks now and counting.

The Bits of Proof back end is serving thousands of users, lots simultanously and is retrieveing hundreds of transactions
out of tens of millions in matter of seconds or less with a criteria that is not a simple query but
a scan depending on previous hits.

This is not a negligible accomplishment, best illustrated by the fact that it is not yet matched by any other
implementation, not even for single user use.

I aopologize for any disruption, but have to emphasize that this software had uptimes north of 95%
in its worst weeks and is still improving.

binford

newbie

Activity: 52

Merit: 0

Quote from: kkurtmann on January 28, 2015, 07:49:51 PM

would satoshilabs be willing to sell me a First Edition metal Trezor for 1.0 BTC ?

try at least tree fiddy

kkurtmann

sr. member

Activity: 475

Merit: 250

Quote from: chrisrico on January 28, 2015, 07:50:09 PM

Quote from: fonsie on January 28, 2015, 11:50:16 AM

why do you think they are switching away from the current backend...

Slush is one of the founders of Satoshi Labs, so I think he would know what they're working on...

Quote from: kkurtmann on January 28, 2015, 07:49:51 PM

would satoshilabs be willing to sell me a first edition metal Trezor for 1.0 BTC ?

They've stated repeatedly that they have no plans of ever offering the metal Trezors again.

I know that but they have extras to give out when they fail which is mostly never, so I assume they have plenty left and I made an offer.

chrisrico

hero member

Activity: 496

Merit: 500

Quote from: fonsie on January 28, 2015, 11:50:16 AM

why do you think they are switching away from the current backend...

Slush is one of the founders of Satoshi Labs, so I think he would know what they're working on...

Quote from: kkurtmann on January 28, 2015, 07:49:51 PM

would satoshilabs be willing to sell me a first edition metal Trezor for 1.0 BTC ?

They've stated repeatedly that they have no plans of ever offering the metal Trezors again.

kkurtmann

sr. member

Activity: 475

Merit: 250

would satoshilabs be willing to sell me a First Edition metal Trezor for 1.0 BTC ?

fonsie

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

I encountered the problem myself only a few times, not anything life threatening

I was stating the actual problem, wich has been complained about numerous times in this very thread, why do you think they are switching away from the current backend...

Quote from: slush on December 12, 2014, 07:19:37 PM

Quote from: dnaleor on December 12, 2014, 07:03:58 PM

mytrezor.com is down again...

Yeah, it was down for few minutes; current backend is driving me nuts. It's failing more and more often and I'll celebrate when I'll "rm -rf" it! We implemented heavy automatic checks and watchdog, so at least it can recover itself after few minutes of downtime.

In meantime we're working hard on replacing current backend by opensource Insight block explorer, but it requires significant refactoring of network API in myTREZOR.

Anon136

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1217

Quote from: dsattler on January 27, 2015, 06:18:23 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 27, 2015, 06:11:48 PM

Quote from: dsattler on January 27, 2015, 05:52:28 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on January 27, 2015, 05:21:27 PM

Quote from: fonsie on January 27, 2015, 02:17:44 PM

Quote from: grau on January 27, 2015, 01:01:52 PM

You likely noticed significant improvement of performce while myTREZOR retrieves balances.
The reason is an upgrade of the back end. Have fun.

The speed wasn't the biggest problem, the fact that it almost never worked when needed however was.

Either you must be very unlucky or I very lucky because I use my trezor several times a day since release and mytrezor.com has only failed me twice in all that time. Which was pretty annoying ill grant but quite a bit less of a problem than what you described.

You can count me to the lucky ones as well, because my trezor worked out of the box without a flaw...

Pretty sure that it is platform dependent, luck is not a factor. Most likely the JS execution of your browser is the major determinant.

I'm using a chrome browser in privacy mode.

Firefox here

dsattler

legendary

Activity: 924

Merit: 1000

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 27, 2015, 06:11:48 PM

Quote from: dsattler on January 27, 2015, 05:52:28 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on January 27, 2015, 05:21:27 PM

Quote from: fonsie on January 27, 2015, 02:17:44 PM

Quote from: grau on January 27, 2015, 01:01:52 PM

You likely noticed significant improvement of performce while myTREZOR retrieves balances.
The reason is an upgrade of the back end. Have fun.

The speed wasn't the biggest problem, the fact that it almost never worked when needed however was.

Either you must be very unlucky or I very lucky because I use my trezor several times a day since release and mytrezor.com has only failed me twice in all that time. Which was pretty annoying ill grant but quite a bit less of a problem than what you described.

You can count me to the lucky ones as well, because my trezor worked out of the box without a flaw...

Pretty sure that it is platform dependent, luck is not a factor. Most likely the JS execution of your browser is the major determinant.

I'm using a chrome browser in privacy mode.

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2349

Eadem mutata resurgo

Quote from: dsattler on January 27, 2015, 05:52:28 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on January 27, 2015, 05:21:27 PM

Quote from: fonsie on January 27, 2015, 02:17:44 PM

Quote from: grau on January 27, 2015, 01:01:52 PM

You likely noticed significant improvement of performce while myTREZOR retrieves balances.
The reason is an upgrade of the back end. Have fun.

The speed wasn't the biggest problem, the fact that it almost never worked when needed however was.

Either you must be very unlucky or I very lucky because I use my trezor several times a day since release and mytrezor.com has only failed me twice in all that time. Which was pretty annoying ill grant but quite a bit less of a problem than what you described.

You can count me to the lucky ones as well, because my trezor worked out of the box without a flaw...

Pretty sure that it is platform dependent, luck is not a factor. Most likely the JS execution of your browser is the major determinant.

dsattler

legendary

Activity: 924

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Anon136 on January 27, 2015, 05:21:27 PM

Quote from: fonsie on January 27, 2015, 02:17:44 PM

Quote from: grau on January 27, 2015, 01:01:52 PM

You likely noticed significant improvement of performce while myTREZOR retrieves balances.
The reason is an upgrade of the back end. Have fun.

The speed wasn't the biggest problem, the fact that it almost never worked when needed however was.

Either you must be very unlucky or I very lucky because I use my trezor several times a day since release and mytrezor.com has only failed me twice in all that time. Which was pretty annoying ill grant but quite a bit less of a problem than what you described.

You can count me to the lucky ones as well, because my trezor worked out of the box without a flaw...

DevonMiner

sr. member

Activity: 471

Merit: 250

Quote from: fonsie on January 27, 2015, 02:17:44 PM

The speed wasn't the biggest problem, the fact that it almost never worked when needed however was.

Spot on .. it was a pain in the a$$, but has been more responsive of late.

Anon136

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1217

Quote from: fonsie on January 27, 2015, 02:17:44 PM

Quote from: grau on January 27, 2015, 01:01:52 PM

You likely noticed significant improvement of performce while myTREZOR retrieves balances.
The reason is an upgrade of the back end. Have fun.

The speed wasn't the biggest problem, the fact that it almost never worked when needed however was.

Either you must be very unlucky or I very lucky because I use my trezor several times a day since release and mytrezor.com has only failed me twice in all that time. Which was pretty annoying ill grant but quite a bit less of a problem than what you described.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: grau on January 27, 2015, 01:01:52 PM

You likely noticed significant improvement of performce while myTREZOR retrieves balances.
The reason is an upgrade of the back end. Have fun.

Thank you very much!

Topic: [ESHOP launched] Trezor: Bitcoin hardware wallet - page 83. (Read 966173 times)