Topic: We need to support honest developers programming Open Source programs (Read 230 times)
July 23, 2024, 03:01:56 PM
If it is not open source, then why should it be accepted for the interest of the users, what are they hiding in which other programmers could not review on and see, if it is open, then it is safe for use, but when its close, we are not sure on what might have been hidden and the intention on such implementation, any reasonable bitcoiner will understand more better about the need for the requirement of bitcoin open source wallets.
July 23, 2024, 09:33:38 AM
Your post is a really good advice and we should really support honest developers programming Open Source programs. I know so many flawed closed source applications, where an open source just should be better but it is not because it's not open source...
May 02, 2024, 08:31:29 AM
Use open-source wallet software, preferably with reproducible builds. Only then you know what's inside the software and you or other people can read and inspect what and how the wallet is doing things. But we all know, this is no easy task to check yourself. It requires skills and time and not everybody has both.
Use hardware wallets with open-source firmware (reproducible builds again prefered), otherwise you can't know what your hardware wallet is actually doing and if you can trust it with your funds. That said: I wouldn't advise to use Ledger hardware crap to anyone. The firmware is closed-source and Ledger company morons lied to you that your seed can't be extracted from the hardware. Ledger programmed seed extraction in their firmware as a paid service. Take this as a lesson what should not be supported.
Use hardware wallets with open-source firmware (reproducible builds again prefered), otherwise you can't know what your hardware wallet is actually doing and if you can trust it with your funds. That said: I wouldn't advise to use Ledger hardware crap to anyone. The firmware is closed-source and Ledger company morons lied to you that your seed can't be extracted from the hardware. Ledger programmed seed extraction in their firmware as a paid service. Take this as a lesson what should not be supported.
April 29, 2024, 08:50:27 AM
Obviously the idea of supporting open source projects is good. I totally get the sense of your topic and I agree with you.
For instance, you said that we should use DDG instead of Google and Firefox instead of Chrome. I agree with you because it is a matter of privacy and Google is notorious in this field.
However, there are products that we still need in our lives that are produced by companies and their code is closed source.
When there is not an obvious matter of anti-privacy pro-censorhip technologies used by a company, I see nothing wrong in supporting (by paying) their products.
For instance, I use lightroom for my photography, because I love it. I also pay some subscriptions for other services that I love. I don't believe companies should stop existing, or that we should stop using their products.
To summarize:
1. Yes! Open source is fantastic and we should encourage developers by either writing code, or by using their software.
2. We must do our own due diligence and demand privacy. So when we know we can't have it, we must take action and perhaps stop paying a product.
3. We should be allowed and encouraged to pay for products and services that we like, no matter if they are open source or not.
4. Open-source doesn't always mean, better and safer.
Like you said, open source software doesn't always mean better and safer, still I think it's development can bring in diverse perspectives above those of a single company. An estimated value of open source software to firms is about $8.8 trillion as firms would need to spend 3.5 times the amount they currently do without the use of open source software.For instance, you said that we should use DDG instead of Google and Firefox instead of Chrome. I agree with you because it is a matter of privacy and Google is notorious in this field.
However, there are products that we still need in our lives that are produced by companies and their code is closed source.
When there is not an obvious matter of anti-privacy pro-censorhip technologies used by a company, I see nothing wrong in supporting (by paying) their products.
For instance, I use lightroom for my photography, because I love it. I also pay some subscriptions for other services that I love. I don't believe companies should stop existing, or that we should stop using their products.
To summarize:
1. Yes! Open source is fantastic and we should encourage developers by either writing code, or by using their software.
2. We must do our own due diligence and demand privacy. So when we know we can't have it, we must take action and perhaps stop paying a product.
3. We should be allowed and encouraged to pay for products and services that we like, no matter if they are open source or not.
4. Open-source doesn't always mean, better and safer.
Open-source software (OSS) is computer software that is released under a license in which the copyright holder grants users the rights to use, study, and can also be able to change, and distribute the software and its source code to anyone and for any purpose.Open-source software may be developed in a collaborative, public manner. Open-source software is a prominent example of open collaboration since it makes the number of possible contributors indefinite. The ability to go through the code facilitates public trust in the software.
Open source software are way better in privacy than closed source ones but the thing that most people don't understand about open source software is that the open source software have to be compiled by oneself in order to have maximum privacy but I don't think that most of us care much about that aspect of the open source software.
Most of us simply download the binary files of open-source software and think that we are using an open-source software but we can be wrong because the compiled binary package may contain malware sometimes. The compiled binary package isn't open-source and no one knows that if the compiled software is fully safe or not, we simply trust it just like we trust closed source software from reputed vendors.
A truly open-source program is the one that you compile yourself by downloading the source files of it. If you believe that packaged binary is open source then you're lying to yourself. If someone really wants to have full privacy then that person needs to understand that how to compile a software source code into binary and then that person can say he's using an open-source software.
I agree that we use such software on daily basis and we're lucky to have all those developers who devote their time to make such software for us, but we should also be concerned about that issue that I mentioned above. To be honest we still can't fully rely on open-source software because most features of the paid software can't be found in open source ones. So for some feature we will have to use closed source software as apogio mentioned.
Even from the mere look, something that you have it's control in your hand is much trust worthy than the one being controlled by someone especially when the person controlling it is not known. In an open source software, the holder can be grant the full permission to study and also change the software and distribute it's source code for anyone irrespective of the purpose. So to me, it's guaranteed to some extent. But still we may need some other sources that aren't OSS. Most of us simply download the binary files of open-source software and think that we are using an open-source software but we can be wrong because the compiled binary package may contain malware sometimes. The compiled binary package isn't open-source and no one knows that if the compiled software is fully safe or not, we simply trust it just like we trust closed source software from reputed vendors.
A truly open-source program is the one that you compile yourself by downloading the source files of it. If you believe that packaged binary is open source then you're lying to yourself. If someone really wants to have full privacy then that person needs to understand that how to compile a software source code into binary and then that person can say he's using an open-source software.
I agree that we use such software on daily basis and we're lucky to have all those developers who devote their time to make such software for us, but we should also be concerned about that issue that I mentioned above. To be honest we still can't fully rely on open-source software because most features of the paid software can't be found in open source ones. So for some feature we will have to use closed source software as apogio mentioned.
April 28, 2024, 01:03:45 PM
Nice compilation. Open source programs and softwares are the real definition of giving the user full control and authority over everything going on in the program especially at the back end. With hacks and , phishing and malwares flooding the internet, open source programs give users the Sense and power to totally control their privacy and data safety.
i do agree with your Topic but why u dont start to support Bitcointalk forum 1st by buying a Copper membership
Then start to support other things around
I really don't think copper membership is a huge support to the forum. If you really wish to support the forum you could do that by making donations to;Then start to support other things around
- TALKImg by joker_jouse
- BPIP managed by LoyceV and Suchmoon
- Or Bitcoin talk super notifier bot by TryNinja
April 28, 2024, 11:08:23 AM
i do agree with your Topic but why u dont start to support Bitcointalk forum 1st by buying a Copper membership
Then start to support other things around
Then start to support other things around
A Copper membership is not necessary for me, as I am already an enrichment enough for the forum through my quality contributions.
Furthermore, the average Bitcointalk user does not have a Copper membership either.
February 20, 2024, 10:24:25 AM
Open source software are way better in privacy than closed source ones but the thing that most people don't understand about open source software is that the open source software have to be compiled by oneself in order to have maximum privacy but I don't think that most of us care much about that aspect of the open source software.
Most of us simply download the binary files of open-source software and think that we are using an open-source software but we can be wrong because the compiled binary package may contain malware sometimes. The compiled binary package isn't open-source and no one knows that if the compiled software is fully safe or not, we simply trust it just like we trust closed source software from reputed vendors.
A truly open-source program is the one that you compile yourself by downloading the source files of it. If you believe that packaged binary is open source then you're lying to yourself. If someone really wants to have full privacy then that person needs to understand that how to compile a software source code into binary and then that person can say he's using an open-source software.
I agree that we use such software on daily basis and we're lucky to have all those developers who devote their time to make such software for us, but we should also be concerned about that issue that I mentioned above. To be honest we still can't fully rely on open-source software because most features of the paid software can't be found in open source ones. So for some feature we will have to use closed source software as apogio mentioned.
Most of us simply download the binary files of open-source software and think that we are using an open-source software but we can be wrong because the compiled binary package may contain malware sometimes. The compiled binary package isn't open-source and no one knows that if the compiled software is fully safe or not, we simply trust it just like we trust closed source software from reputed vendors.
A truly open-source program is the one that you compile yourself by downloading the source files of it. If you believe that packaged binary is open source then you're lying to yourself. If someone really wants to have full privacy then that person needs to understand that how to compile a software source code into binary and then that person can say he's using an open-source software.
I agree that we use such software on daily basis and we're lucky to have all those developers who devote their time to make such software for us, but we should also be concerned about that issue that I mentioned above. To be honest we still can't fully rely on open-source software because most features of the paid software can't be found in open source ones. So for some feature we will have to use closed source software as apogio mentioned.
February 20, 2024, 02:36:30 AM
One of the biggest steps for the open source was Github, they changed the rules by offering a service where anyone can upload their codes and let the community make any changes to it, so if you want to support, I feel the GitHub guys are the ones that we have to say thanks to.
Let me say Git in general. Or perhaps Version Control systems in general, because Git isn't the only one available, but it's the clear winner among them.
Having said that, people can contribute in various websites that support Git, like Github, Gitlab, Bitbucket etc.
I think (fun fact) that Gitlab is the only one that is still open source, as a platform. Github is owned by Microsoft and Bitbucket by Atlassian. But it doesn't really matter, the conclusion is that open source is hugely benefited from Git.
February 19, 2024, 03:33:31 PM
I loved open-source projects from the point when i read about Linux for the first time, in that moment in installed Fedora, and has been 21 years now working with Open Source programs. So, long live open-source projects, they came to change the software rules.
One of the biggest steps for the open source was Github, they changed the rules by offering a service where anyone can upload their codes and let the community make any changes to it, so if you want to support, I feel the GitHub guys are the ones that we have to say thanks to.
And the cool part about open-source projects is that you don't have to donate money, it's better for them if you donate some time to test the codes and help by fixing some bugs.
One of the biggest steps for the open source was Github, they changed the rules by offering a service where anyone can upload their codes and let the community make any changes to it, so if you want to support, I feel the GitHub guys are the ones that we have to say thanks to.
And the cool part about open-source projects is that you don't have to donate money, it's better for them if you donate some time to test the codes and help by fixing some bugs.
February 19, 2024, 01:36:29 PM
We need to support honest developers programming Open Source programs
We can also vote our support: decide for better, Open Source programs from honest developers. By doing so, we can make such programs more popular and more established by giving recommendations for such programs and advise against big corporate products:
Support Electrum instead of Blockchain.com wallet
Support Firefox Browser instead of Google Chrome Browser
Support DuckDuck Go search engine instead of Google search
Support Gimp drawing tool instead of Photoshop
…
We can also vote our support: decide for better, Open Source programs from honest developers. By doing so, we can make such programs more popular and more established by giving recommendations for such programs and advise against big corporate products:
Support Electrum instead of Blockchain.com wallet
Support Firefox Browser instead of Google Chrome Browser
Support DuckDuck Go search engine instead of Google search
Support Gimp drawing tool instead of Photoshop
…
I agree but some of these freeware stuff sadly aren't as good as their counterparts. For example, duckduckgo is way too stupid compared to google and google censors its results heavily and yet it still wins. Firefox is a nice browser but chrome based brave browser is better for now I think and it is also open source.
Electrum is better than blockchain.com without a doubt.
Gimp vs photoshop is a tough one if you are professional but as a hobbyist, I can tell that gimp is more than enough for me.
The most important one is Linux vs Windows. Any Linux distribution is better than any windows version. I also don't buy any hardware that doesn't offer linux support. I don't buy any software that is only available on Mac/Win. Some of them can work on wine but I refuse to go through the hassle.
Screen recording: OBS Studio
Video editing: Kdenlive
Office: LibreOffice
^ These work great.
Also we need to support these devs even though they offer their work for free. $5, $10... Just buy them a beer when you can.
February 19, 2024, 01:19:34 PM
Obviously the idea of supporting open source projects is good. I totally get the sense of your topic and I agree with you.
For instance, you said that we should use DDG instead of Google and Firefox instead of Chrome. I agree with you because it is a matter of privacy and Google is notorious in this field.
However, there are products that we still need in our lives that are produced by companies and their code is closed source.
When there is not an obvious matter of anti-privacy pro-censorhip technologies used by a company, I see nothing wrong in supporting (by paying) their products.
For instance, I use lightroom for my photography, because I love it. I also pay some subscriptions for other services that I love. I don't believe companies should stop existing, or that we should stop using their products.
To summarize:
1. Yes! Open source is fantastic and we should encourage developers by either writing code, or by using their software.
2. We must do our own due diligence and demand privacy. So when we know we can't have it, we must take action and perhaps stop paying a product.
3. We should be allowed and encouraged to pay for products and services that we like, no matter if they are open source or not.
4. Open-source doesn't always mean, better and safer.
For instance, you said that we should use DDG instead of Google and Firefox instead of Chrome. I agree with you because it is a matter of privacy and Google is notorious in this field.
However, there are products that we still need in our lives that are produced by companies and their code is closed source.
When there is not an obvious matter of anti-privacy pro-censorhip technologies used by a company, I see nothing wrong in supporting (by paying) their products.
For instance, I use lightroom for my photography, because I love it. I also pay some subscriptions for other services that I love. I don't believe companies should stop existing, or that we should stop using their products.
To summarize:
1. Yes! Open source is fantastic and we should encourage developers by either writing code, or by using their software.
2. We must do our own due diligence and demand privacy. So when we know we can't have it, we must take action and perhaps stop paying a product.
3. We should be allowed and encouraged to pay for products and services that we like, no matter if they are open source or not.
4. Open-source doesn't always mean, better and safer.
February 19, 2024, 12:32:53 PM
i do agree with your Topic but why u dont start to support Bitcointalk forum 1st by buying a Copper membership
Then start to support other things around
Then start to support other things around
February 19, 2024, 12:02:21 PM
Your topic is really important advice.
Open Source is always better because it can be verified by true experts and Code is public. It is not only important to discourage fraud Code but also to detect an unnoticed flaw in a Code.
As far as I know Bitcoin is also an open Source project where Code was and can be verified and checked.
Open Source is always better because it can be verified by true experts and Code is public. It is not only important to discourage fraud Code but also to detect an unnoticed flaw in a Code.
As far as I know Bitcoin is also an open Source project where Code was and can be verified and checked.
February 19, 2024, 10:05:32 AM
Blockchain is very famous now because many voluntary developers helped to code programs around it very early. Bitcoin's infrastructure is well established and we can select from a wide range of very secure programs like Bitcoin Core, Electrum, Wasabi Wallet or Mycelium.
Many new features have been launched from Bitcoin's code itself, like Segwit or Taproot.
Not limited to Bitcoin, Open Source coders have contributed a lot, like Firefox Browser, DuckDuck Go search engine, Tor Browser or even Linux.
Honest developers are always big contributors, especially for Bitcoin’s success but not limited to it.
Why Open Source programs?
Programs coded as Open Source code are programs, where every coder can review it independently and look into it. Often, it is hosted on GitHub, a famous programmer website.
Open Source code is important for many reasons:
- Malicious code can be identified from experienced programmers– if it's closed, nobody will know about it
- Potential security risks can be identified quickly
Open source code programs should always be our selection of choice. Open Source code programs are very reliable, if reviewed from multiple programmers and established for a long time. Of course, we still should do our own research because Open Source code is no guarantee.
We need to support honest developers programming Open Source programs
We can also vote our support: decide for better, Open Source programs from honest developers. By doing so, we can make such programs more popular and more established by giving recommendations for such programs and advise against big corporate products:
Support Electrum instead of Blockchain.com wallet
Support Firefox Browser instead of Google Chrome Browser
Support DuckDuck Go search engine instead of Google search
Support Gimp drawing tool instead of Photoshop
…
We have so many options to support honest developers by deciding for their Open Source programs and against big, corporate products.
It is important for us to keep supporting honest developers and Open Source code.
Many new features have been launched from Bitcoin's code itself, like Segwit or Taproot.
Not limited to Bitcoin, Open Source coders have contributed a lot, like Firefox Browser, DuckDuck Go search engine, Tor Browser or even Linux.
Honest developers are always big contributors, especially for Bitcoin’s success but not limited to it.
Why Open Source programs?
Programs coded as Open Source code are programs, where every coder can review it independently and look into it. Often, it is hosted on GitHub, a famous programmer website.
Open Source code is important for many reasons:
- Malicious code can be identified from experienced programmers– if it's closed, nobody will know about it
- Potential security risks can be identified quickly
Open source code programs should always be our selection of choice. Open Source code programs are very reliable, if reviewed from multiple programmers and established for a long time. Of course, we still should do our own research because Open Source code is no guarantee.
We need to support honest developers programming Open Source programs
We can also vote our support: decide for better, Open Source programs from honest developers. By doing so, we can make such programs more popular and more established by giving recommendations for such programs and advise against big corporate products:
Support Electrum instead of Blockchain.com wallet
Support Firefox Browser instead of Google Chrome Browser
Support DuckDuck Go search engine instead of Google search
Support Gimp drawing tool instead of Photoshop
…
We have so many options to support honest developers by deciding for their Open Source programs and against big, corporate products.
It is important for us to keep supporting honest developers and Open Source code.
Jump to: