I mean, there are levels to software bruh - anything related to self custody should be FOSS as development synergies literally leave us better protected.

Look at the innovation of antiklepto that Bitbox instituted - Trezor is adding once taproot is figured out with it - bet your black ass cuckcard steals that.

SeedSigner created the SeedQR;

I championed Foundation to add it to passport coming in the release after next I believe;

Blockstream Jade already adopted;

Bet your black ass cuckcard adds it too with the Q1;

It's okay to create things that aren't FOSS, but you're not being honest here if we're discussing critical components of global Bitcoin self custody.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

FOSS BITCOIN CUSTODY TOOLS >

#[0]

It's still open source which is the only point I'm making here. You don't have to "trust" them like people keep implying.

No it's not & you're purposely misleading people if your code isn't FOSS & you're calling it "OPEN".

OPEN = FREE TO USE

Your source is "VIEWABLE" if it's use is restricted.

Which is obviously better than closed source.

That's obviously not true, if it was there'd be no need for the term FOSS. Hell, some people even differentiate between FOSS and FLOSS.

Yeah we have to use FOSS because of people like you who tried to co-opt the original term/ethos.

By original, you're referring to RMS's four freedoms?

Microsoft would probably hire you πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

Some more context..

Misrepresenting things to promote his horse in the race = VC 101.

Work for any VC & you'll have to do this eventually.

Have shares in the VC? Forget it your incentives go out the window with respect to morality.

I''m a FOSS maximalist when it comes to Bitcoin self custody.

Why am I FOSS maxi?

Here's part of it;

#[2]