"In 2017, the project was purchased by the cryptocurrency company CanYa, and in 2020 it was sold to The Blockchain Group."
Does the article need to say more?
yieldcrv 3 days ago [-]
or you can criticize individual companies in the blockchain space, like this article does about the founders of the blockchain group
the government knows how to, but that’s why we have representatives, founding fathers figured the masses weren’t smart enough
but you can prove them wrong, I believe in you
01HNNWZ0MV43FF 3 days ago [-]
What are the legit block chain companies?
fragmede 1 days ago [-]
If you buy into crypto in the first place, Coinbase, Alchemy, and Edge and Node come to mind, as well as the Solana Foundation and Solana Labs, also the Ethereum Foundation.
yieldcrv 2 days ago [-]
you're not willing to discuss a company changing its terms of service to take unclaimed bounties solely for the enrichment of the two founders, because you think the sector itself isn't worth your thought?
that's a "you" problem, and contributing to the problem you perceive, if people feel like they won't be individually criticized if they pivot to that sector.
another way to think about it is if we paraded the behavior of every incorporated business around as international news - like we do for the crypto space - you would be asking if there were any legit businesses anywhere. its a representation problem.
staying on topic: most blockchain companies do not change their terms of service to take unclaimed bounties solely for the enrichment of their founders. most are not in the business of bounties and that has nothing to do with whether you would find them "legit" or not.
nbdy 1 days ago [-]
so you can't name any?
yieldcrv 1 days ago [-]
there are plenty of blockchain organizations I find legit, typically the people asking these questions are looking for a fictional use case they never imagined of which they are the target audience, and view not being the audience as invalidating everyone else that is. its an impossible standard to entertain, its not interesting to watch the goalposts move of them debating why its not useful to them, instead of legit, instead of asking why other people find it useful and then catering to whatever frictions they currently encounter….. like every competitive market does
nbdy 1 days ago [-]
I'm asking out of curiosity, probably just like the other guy. If you know a few Blockchain organizations, which you find legit, you could have just listed them.
yieldcrv 1 days ago [-]
Uniswap
Quickswap
Many other organizations surrounding forks of Uniswap V2 they deployed on other EVMs
Coinbase
Fidelity
Blackrock
Metamask
Phantom
Thirdweb
OpenZeppelin
Multicoin
Hardhat
Paradigm and their support of Foundry
Avalanche Labs
WAGMI
BuildBear
Solana Labs
Messari
Elliptic
Chainanalysis
Custodia bank
There are many charts of segments the ecosystem.
I would say many of the labs+foundation organizations are functioning in a noneventful fine way around their protocols. Other bounty systems are functioning fine noneventfully. Research firms as well. Private equity and hedge funds. Other institutional financial firms. Teams maintaining battle tested protocols.
Its just such a bizarre question to me, with my lack of answer being seen as an indictment validating everyone else's own…. ignorance? Whats the standard for legit? This is an article about changing a terms of service unscrupulously. Most tech companies that are respected have granted themselves the right to do that, and we debate that specific company’s policy and their leadership as individuals. “Legit” would be seen as a juvenile question towards those companies as they do 100 different things, some well, some controversial.
Most of those above organizations are employers, some of the ones with tokens compensate comparatively to FAANGs or way higher if the token grants appreciated in value. They have good relationships with all their stakeholders and their mission or products for their community.
Hope it inspires other people to ask a more intelligent question at the same standard they do of other industries.
skissane 4 days ago [-]
A big problem here is BountySource was structured as a for-profit business. If someone pursued the same idea as a not-for-profit, this diversion of funds would be less likely. Not impossible: it isn’t as if no not-for-profit has ever misused funds. But the system is set up to make that less likely, and to have greater legal recourse when it happens
donor20 4 days ago [-]
This is false. For profit companies clear and custody billions per day successfully.
Brokerages, banks, title and escrow companies, clearing companies.
Crypto/web3.0 - for some reason I always end up trusting these folks LESS not more
skissane 4 days ago [-]
> This is false. For profit companies clear and custody billions per day successfully.
> Brokerages, banks, title and escrow companies, clearing companies.
Those are all highly regulated industries. Some of them would love to put stuff in their T&Cs like BountySource’s “if the beneficiary doesn’t withdraw the money after 2 years we get to keep it” but the regulators would never let them. For a business like BountySource, that level of regulation does not exist
galaxyofdoom 3 days ago [-]
[dead]
bombcar 4 days ago [-]
It is also naive - non profits have bountiful ways of making money disappear into pockets in all sorts of legal manners. It’s an entire industry - and by being non-profit they can be almost entirely impossible to “control” once the board is captured.
skissane 4 days ago [-]
I think you’d want the money to be held by an organisation which is respectable and has some backing and track record - e.g. the OSI, FSF, Linux Foundation, Software Freedom Conservancy - orgs like that are unlikely to redirect the funds into something completely unrelated.
There does need to be some flexibility however - e.g. if a project is defunct and nobody wants to work on it, it is stupid just to leave funding in a bank account forever. But if you give it to another open source project (preferably one in the same area) I think that is fine. Adding it to the coffers of a for-profit company isn’t
And it might be reasonable for a not-for-profit to contract with a for-profit firm to administer such a funding scheme - but they should only be trustees of the funds (so if they go bankrupt the creditors can’t touch it) and they only get paid a defined percentage as a fee for service
xmodem 3 days ago [-]
This obviously varies a lot by jurisdiction, but non-profits typically have much stricter transparency requirements than for-profit entities.
When I was involved in scouts this was a thing as well; not even always due to malice, sometimes also due to incompetence and/or inattention.
skissane 3 days ago [-]
Yes, but the particular type of non-profit I had in mind – in a sibling reply I gave examples of the OSI, FSF, Linux Foundation, Software Freedom Conservancy – do groups like those have a history of fraud and embezzlement?
Evidence of fraud in other, very different non-profits – which I agree exists – doesn't really answer that question
djbusby 4 days ago [-]
Super unfortunate.
And worse: it taints the whole space. The "Bad Apple" if you will.
I'm in a different space and it has some dodgy actors. Which means everyone has their guard up - and that increases the burden for the honest actors.
daghamm 3 days ago [-]
Reminder that librapay exists, and their developers are only paid from user donations, just like anyone else on the platform.
(I only wish their CC costs could be reduced a bit to make micropayments viable)
internetter 3 days ago [-]
That's cool and all, but as the blog author I have a Liberapay account. It's provided me with $800, which is about $800 more than I expected to make.
It has not provided me with an appropriate level of income for the effort I put into this site. Since instantiating my account, I've recieved 871,000 views on my website.
That means I make $1.1 per 1000 views. That means that if, theoretically, I wanted to do this part time, I would need to be getting what... 50 times the amount I'm getting right now? If I wanted a wage of $20/h (that's not even a living wage where I live) for the time I've spent doing writing related things, I'd need something like 5-10x more?
Asking people for money isn't working. Maybe I should offer ad slots to corporations? Daring Fireball somehow makes 500k a year just doing this. Except it hasn't worked: https://boehs.org/sponsor
Is it the platform I use? Maybe people are scared of liberapay. So I try kofi — nothing.
Maybe its because I'm not established?
Maybe the Substack model works, where you aggressively push it on people. But I don't want to do that. I don't want to sell out.
Maybe I publish my posts at LWN, which is paid and can offer $400 as a starting per article wage (I have 4 "possibly LWN eligible articles", so maybe with the pay scaling I'd get 3x more with the 2 week exclusive agreement?)
But anyway, my point is that if you give something for free and then ask for their generosity, it won't make you a whole lotta money. That is fine I guess for my website, really, as its mostly writing about my curiosities. But it could be more. And the bountysource model makes sense, because you are no longer giving something for free. You are automatically a contractor of sorts. People pay you to do work.
daghamm 2 days ago [-]
You can see how much projects and developers make on librapay. It's up to a few hundreds a week. This is definitely not FU money, but maybe enough to keep them motivated or pay their computer expenses.
justinclift 3 days ago [-]
Do I just need more coffee, or does that list of figures add up to more than $20k+, rather than $17k+?
internetter 3 days ago [-]
Hmm your right, good catch, I'm the one who needs more of it :)
Unfortunately I cannot change the title here, but I've fixed it in the article
justinclift 3 days ago [-]
No worries. ;)
thebigspacefuck 3 days ago [-]
Bountysource has been offline for a bit. Does anyone know of an alternative?
samyar 3 days ago [-]
communism is a nice promise that will never succussed.
Rendered at 16:35:10 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
Does the article need to say more?
the government knows how to, but that’s why we have representatives, founding fathers figured the masses weren’t smart enough
but you can prove them wrong, I believe in you
that's a "you" problem, and contributing to the problem you perceive, if people feel like they won't be individually criticized if they pivot to that sector.
another way to think about it is if we paraded the behavior of every incorporated business around as international news - like we do for the crypto space - you would be asking if there were any legit businesses anywhere. its a representation problem.
staying on topic: most blockchain companies do not change their terms of service to take unclaimed bounties solely for the enrichment of their founders. most are not in the business of bounties and that has nothing to do with whether you would find them "legit" or not.
Quickswap
Many other organizations surrounding forks of Uniswap V2 they deployed on other EVMs
Coinbase
Fidelity
Blackrock
Metamask
Phantom
Thirdweb
OpenZeppelin
Multicoin
Hardhat
Paradigm and their support of Foundry
Avalanche Labs
WAGMI
BuildBear
Solana Labs
Messari
Elliptic
Chainanalysis
Custodia bank
There are many charts of segments the ecosystem.
I would say many of the labs+foundation organizations are functioning in a noneventful fine way around their protocols. Other bounty systems are functioning fine noneventfully. Research firms as well. Private equity and hedge funds. Other institutional financial firms. Teams maintaining battle tested protocols.
Its just such a bizarre question to me, with my lack of answer being seen as an indictment validating everyone else's own…. ignorance? Whats the standard for legit? This is an article about changing a terms of service unscrupulously. Most tech companies that are respected have granted themselves the right to do that, and we debate that specific company’s policy and their leadership as individuals. “Legit” would be seen as a juvenile question towards those companies as they do 100 different things, some well, some controversial.
Most of those above organizations are employers, some of the ones with tokens compensate comparatively to FAANGs or way higher if the token grants appreciated in value. They have good relationships with all their stakeholders and their mission or products for their community.
Hope it inspires other people to ask a more intelligent question at the same standard they do of other industries.
Brokerages, banks, title and escrow companies, clearing companies.
Crypto/web3.0 - for some reason I always end up trusting these folks LESS not more
> Brokerages, banks, title and escrow companies, clearing companies.
Those are all highly regulated industries. Some of them would love to put stuff in their T&Cs like BountySource’s “if the beneficiary doesn’t withdraw the money after 2 years we get to keep it” but the regulators would never let them. For a business like BountySource, that level of regulation does not exist
There does need to be some flexibility however - e.g. if a project is defunct and nobody wants to work on it, it is stupid just to leave funding in a bank account forever. But if you give it to another open source project (preferably one in the same area) I think that is fine. Adding it to the coffers of a for-profit company isn’t
And it might be reasonable for a not-for-profit to contract with a for-profit firm to administer such a funding scheme - but they should only be trustees of the funds (so if they go bankrupt the creditors can’t touch it) and they only get paid a defined percentage as a fee for service
When I was involved in scouts this was a thing as well; not even always due to malice, sometimes also due to incompetence and/or inattention.
Evidence of fraud in other, very different non-profits – which I agree exists – doesn't really answer that question
And worse: it taints the whole space. The "Bad Apple" if you will.
I'm in a different space and it has some dodgy actors. Which means everyone has their guard up - and that increases the burden for the honest actors.
https://liberapay.com/
(I only wish their CC costs could be reduced a bit to make micropayments viable)
It has not provided me with an appropriate level of income for the effort I put into this site. Since instantiating my account, I've recieved 871,000 views on my website.
That means I make $1.1 per 1000 views. That means that if, theoretically, I wanted to do this part time, I would need to be getting what... 50 times the amount I'm getting right now? If I wanted a wage of $20/h (that's not even a living wage where I live) for the time I've spent doing writing related things, I'd need something like 5-10x more?
Asking people for money isn't working. Maybe I should offer ad slots to corporations? Daring Fireball somehow makes 500k a year just doing this. Except it hasn't worked: https://boehs.org/sponsor
Is it the platform I use? Maybe people are scared of liberapay. So I try kofi — nothing.
Maybe its because I'm not established?
Maybe the Substack model works, where you aggressively push it on people. But I don't want to do that. I don't want to sell out.
Maybe I publish my posts at LWN, which is paid and can offer $400 as a starting per article wage (I have 4 "possibly LWN eligible articles", so maybe with the pay scaling I'd get 3x more with the 2 week exclusive agreement?)
But anyway, my point is that if you give something for free and then ask for their generosity, it won't make you a whole lotta money. That is fine I guess for my website, really, as its mostly writing about my curiosities. But it could be more. And the bountysource model makes sense, because you are no longer giving something for free. You are automatically a contractor of sorts. People pay you to do work.
Unfortunately I cannot change the title here, but I've fixed it in the article