Replying to Avatar Tim Bouma

I believe it’s mostly grants because the everyone believes the outcome of the work is still ‘pre-commercial’ and more in the ‘public interest’. That is to say, no one yet knows what the business models will be to drive the return on investment. Still unknown if nostr is a fad/novelty or a key building block of the future.
Avatar
Laeserin 1y ago

The grants (including VC funding, which might eventually disappear under a Bitcoin Standard) are used to fund the "big jump" versions, where they move quickly from an idea or simple PoC to a completely revamped and fleshed-out version. Then they are weaned off of the grants or the grants are reduced, and they attempt to quickly match the missing funds with fees, to cover running costs.

There is currently no universally-viable concept for fully returning the costs Big Jumps incurr.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Tim Bouma 1y ago

Then there is the question of open source. Most grants require the work to be open source at the outset.Perfectly fine, but negating the possibility of an initial commercial advantage. Many are perfectly happy to give everything away for a few zaps, but others want to invest first for an advantage before giving away.

Avatar
Laeserin 1y ago

This will not be feasible, soon, as reverse-engineering automation will make everything de facto open-source. We just have to adjust to FOSS.

Avatar
ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 1y ago

as it already was, disassembly was pretty sophisticated but add an AI to that to nail down the architecture, game over

Avatar
liminal 🦠 1y ago

Binary is just a language as any other. Curious at its efficacy for reverse engineering.