2 ms·
I don’t know how to write it better. I never said Qubes should change their biz model or do an ICO. Full stop. All I said is that their product would be great
by ecesena 9y ago
I don’t know how to write it better. I never said Qubes should change their biz model or do an ICO. Full stop.
All I said is that their product would be great in the hands of a startup that focuses on a single hardware platform and does more marketing, and/or does an ico because I see a great incentive to run nodes of the cloud (because qubes utself provides all the building block for trust).
> If you follow Qubes
I do, since 2010, when I was doing very similar research on trusted cloud computing.
> If they can find a home in the enterprise market
I wish it to them, but this doesn’t mean someone else can try a more aggressive consumer route, or an alternative for their cloud model.
I respect a ton their work, and as I said in my very first comment I think they should focus on the research part, and someone else could provide capital and grow the consumer product.
- kakarot 9y agoI don’t know how to write it better. I never said Qubes should change their biz model or do an ICO. Full stop. All I said is that their product would be great in the hands of a startup that focuses on a single hardware platform and does more marketing That's strange, because the first sentence in your OP is: Qubes would make for a great startup and, given the time, prob a very successful ICO.
- ecesena 9y agoOoops, you’re absolutely right and now I understand all the downvotes. In my mind I was thinking to Qubes as the product(s), that could benefit from a startup. Similarly to as Kafka has Confluent, or Druid has Imply. And I fully agree that Qubes the company should continue to be focus on research.
- kakarot 9y agoFWIW, none of them came from me. And I see the confusion now: Qubes isn't a company, the company is Invisible Things Lab.