3 ms·

If you're going to be so negligent that you don't care to design your free product in such a way that it doesn't let people's money get stolen so easily, it's b

If you're going to be so negligent that you don't care to design your free product in such a way that it doesn't let people's money get stolen so easily, it's better not to release at all. Complicated security vulnerabilities, I get. It's tough. But just the basic thought to inform someone that a message is not from the Electrum "team" would be nice. It's unreasonable to expect everyone to read every bit source code of all open (or closed) source software they use. If I were to use Linux for free, and in this imaginary world all of the sudden I had my banking credentials stolen from a similar lack of care, I think I'd be justifiably upset. Should the people who lost money be thankful they got to use Electrum in the first place?

nradov 8y ago
There's no negligence in giving software away for free. No one is stopping users from doing their own security audits, or hiring experts to do it for them. Beggars can't be choosers, and if users are upset at anyone it should be the thief. Cryptocurrencies are speculative trading vehicles, not money. No one actually lost anything of real value. A fool and his coins are soon parted.
- Kaveren 8y ago
  If Visual Studio Code, which is open source software I use daily and have not audited, tells me to update and I lose something of value to me from it, I'm going to be furious. You can debate about the "real value" of Bitcoin or lack thereof, but I'm sure it had "real value" to the people who lost it. If people will pay $5 for Bitcoin, its worth at the time is $5, if $3,000, "real value" is $3,000. But that's besides the point. Again, I've never really used Bitcoin and don't find it particularly promising, it's not my hill to die on. I do care about an issue like this, though.
  - nradov 8y ago
    If having quality software is important to you then you might want to actually pay a vendor that you can hold accountable rather than depending on the kindness of strangers. Free software is great! I use it all the time. But I'm under no illusions about imaginary negligence or accountability.

nradov 8y ago

There's no negligence in giving software away for free. No one is stopping users from doing their own security audits, or hiring experts to do it for them. Beggars can't be choosers, and if users are upset at anyone it should be the thief. Cryptocurrencies are speculative trading vehicles, not money. No one actually lost anything of real value. A fool and his coins are soon parted.

Kaveren 8y ago
If Visual Studio Code, which is open source software I use daily and have not audited, tells me to update and I lose something of value to me from it, I'm going to be furious. You can debate about the "real value" of Bitcoin or lack thereof, but I'm sure it had "real value" to the people who lost it. If people will pay $5 for Bitcoin, its worth at the time is $5, if $3,000, "real value" is $3,000. But that's besides the point. Again, I've never really used Bitcoin and don't find it particularly promising, it's not my hill to die on. I do care about an issue like this, though.
- nradov 8y ago
  If having quality software is important to you then you might want to actually pay a vendor that you can hold accountable rather than depending on the kindness of strangers. Free software is great! I use it all the time. But I'm under no illusions about imaginary negligence or accountability.