4 ms·
If 2/3 of the members vote for something but the infrastructure is built/developed by facebook, I wonder if Facebook can simply say no. Not in the sense of publ
by lammalamma25 7y ago
If 2/3 of the members vote for something but the infrastructure is built/developed by facebook, I wonder if Facebook can simply say no. Not in the sense of publicly refusing to do it, but if something is not in their interest, they could slow it down or do it poorly so that it doesn't work. It seems the other members would have to take something like that over to get it done which is costly and may not be worth their time/money.
- carlosdp 7y agoAny of the members can build their own implementation of the Libra protocol and give it to other members, or they can take Facebook's and modify it (it's already open-source on Github). Several of the members are already software shops that would gladly manage an implementation if the interests of Libra (and therefore, their own interests, cause they would only care if Libra were successful) were threatened by the Facebook implementation.
- davidgerard 7y ago> it's already open-source on Github the released code appears to be rudimentary at best https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-20/facebook-s-libra-cryptocurrency-isn-t-actually-supposed-to-work https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-20/facebo...
- carlosdp 7y agoIt's early, but I wouldn't call it rudimentary... Cryptocurrency implementations are complicated distributed systems problems. If the code were more complete, I'd wager the author would be complaining that too much of it was developed in private. Idk, we don't need to depend on Bloomberg's opinion, we can check out the code ourselves: https://github.com/libra/libra https://github.com/libra/libra .