the proposal has been removed
3 Likes
I havenât looked in deep till now but, rushing through âTerms of Serviceâ on your site I got stuck at:
âYou shall not reverse engineer, decompile or otherwise disassemble our Servicesâ
Isnât the code available in your github anyway? If this isnât the case I am not sure if it fits the values of the typical gc user. Personally I wouldnât use it for more as some play money.
Also I couldnât find any info about the structure of your project. Are you a âfor profitâ company?
Might you give us some introduction about this? E.g. How many you are, were you are located and how you got funded till now?
1 Like
Yes finally! Love Infinity Wallet using it for the last 6 months after switching from MM and ow my god its a total next level experience, sadly still having to use Metamask for some chains like Gnosis, but hopefully that changes soon with this. Insane good wallet, best live support which is great for a fully decentralized platform and the best in tech and UI/UX, if only all projects were up to such standards and innovative in the space like IW we might have mass adoption already xD
2 Likes
From what I know I believe they are a self funded free to use platform with no investors or funding operating for 2 years, but I think they are best at answering that 100%.
3 Likes
Not sure it even matters if a project is open-source or not as long as decentralized. If we are funding a projects development then yeah should be open-source, but funding integration/deployment into existing big platforms or infrastructure like wallets is needed for Gnosis growth and adoption, especially when 99.99999% of users donât bother about open-source and just want innovative and user friendly projects.
If limited to open-source Gnosis will never get the adoption it deserves. Most large software platforms are not open-source for either security concerns around open-sourcing software, competitive/business issues it causes, extra cost/time etc. Integration/deployment into existing platforms is something we have to pay as a chain if we think they will help Gnosis grow, and canât expect them to support us with free infrastructure and marketing out of their own generosity.
Agree that open source shouldnât be a must in all instances (although I doubt that < 0.00001% care about) but in case of a wallet we fund to integrate GC we should either be able to judge about security or know who will take care (and responsibility) of it.
1 Like
I donât think supporting a centralized closed source wallet like this is a good idea. The proposed budget is excessive given the listed deliverables.
I tried doing some research into Infinity Wallet and didnât find anything except for some proposals to other protocols, promotional pieces posing as news, and two individuals on LinkedIn. They have also had the exact same three positions listed as open on their website for two years.
I do not support this proposal.
EDIT: Their mobile versions have also been listed as âcoming soonâ for two years.
3 Likes
I looked into them and they are decentralized so just seems like your trolling them.
1 Like
I agree that knowing the company/team that is doing the integration, but you canât really ever judge security by open-source software. Open-source code may not always be the same as that which is served on the website download link, so unless you:
- Download the open-source code;
- Review every line of code;
- Compile the app;
- Repeat with every update;
Then open-source software means nothing at all.
Especially since 99.999999999% of users will download via a website. I have had a business in the past and open-source matters nothing to retail users, all it matters to is the very small % of devs/scammers that want to run locally/contribute or clone/scams users. Open-source is generally good for protocols, blockchains, libraries and certain platforms, and generally depends on the company/team focus and resources needed to maintain open-source which can be quite a lot depending on the type of project.
EDIT: As for this specific proposal, I personally would never open-source wallet software as it provides too many opportunities for end users to be scammed easily, proprietary software to be cloned and etcâŚ, especially for larger well known wallets focusing on end users rather then developers. It wouldnât provide any benefit to the wallets team by open-sourcing, it would only benefit a very very small % of devs or scammers.
Just wanted to say I use IW and its fantastic. One of the best unique wallets in the space and would really like to GNO supported
@jbradach calling it centralized when its false as they are decentralized is quite low
Even though I agree that no single person will review every line if code before using a piece of software, I strongly believe that it makes software more trustworthy if the code is easily accessible to review.
The code donât have to be free to use for everyone, even Metamask went from the MIT license, but it should be auditable for everyone interested to do so.
Therefore I still donât see a valid reason for the sentence I cited in my first comment taken from the terms of use of infinity wallet.
edit: and I wonder why @InfinityWallet didnât address it in the comment above, maybe the code is completely available in GitHub and the sentence found its way to the terms of use only by using some universal templets?
1 Like