5 ms·

> Upon successful submission of a package, the package maintainer will receive an NFT to evidence their work and contribution. The holder of this NFT will autom

> Upon successful submission of a package, the package maintainer will receive an NFT to evidence their work and contribution. The holder of this NFT will automatically receive all rewards associated with the package. Package maintainers may transfer maintenance ownership over a package to another package maintainer by simply transferring the package’s NFT. Successful transfer of the NFT will lead to the new owner automatically receiving future package rewards. I want literally nothing to do with a cross between a binary distribution tool and a cryptocurrency pump and dump.

jerpint 4y ago
What makes you think this is a pump and dump scheme? Other than the word blockchain
- j4hdufd8 4y ago
  The word NFT
- RL_Quine 4y ago
  The website linked, and it's associated information all absolutely scream red flags and is functionally similar to a hoard of other schemes. It's a technically simple product (distribute binaries from a webserver) with a completely arbitrary cryptocurrency stuffed onto the side, allowing for bombastic, buzzword filled claims which just defy reality. It attempts to promote itself by driving users who will get some form of profit sharing as part of their participation, promising some sort of rewards paid by the creator. > Package maintainers will publish their releases to a decentralized registry powered by a Byzantine fault-tolerant blockchain to eliminate single sources of failure, provide immutable releases, and allow communities to govern their regions of the open-source ecosystem, independent of external agendas. It's existence is an attempt to justify the creation of yet another cryptocurrency, not as a serious solution to any problem that exists in distributing software.
  - febeling 4y ago
    Is the fact that many maintainers burn out and earn no money and little recognition not a serious problem?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - duskwuff 4y ago
      That isn't a fact. Keep in mind that this scheme wouldn't reward the authors of software -- it rewards the people who create and upload packages. Those usually aren't the same people, and the maintainers that are most subject to burnout are the authors, not the packagers. It also appears to require those developers to purchase (or otherwise acquire) tokens before adding software to the packaging system.
      - shepherdjerred 4y ago
        > Keep in mind that this scheme wouldn't reward the authors of software -- it rewards the people who create and upload packages. Those usually aren't the same people, and the maintainers that are most subject to burnout are the authors, not the packagers. It creates an incentive to package software for the ecosystem, which is a pretty good goal to achieve for a package manager -- especially a brand new one where it would be hard to gain traction without a large number of packages.
    - Finnucane 4y ago
      This will pay them in quatloos, not money.
      - febeling 4y ago
        Many people will get some satisfaction out of it, if they only receive points or badges. Look at Stackoverflow or GH stars.
        4y ago
- qbasic_forever 4y ago
  Being associated with Binance.
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  I don't doubt that the author if tea is well-meaning, I think the issue is how it's going to get used, which is what the other poster was referring to.
jakelazaroff 4y ago
Love to irreversibly lose control of my packages because of a phishing scam or a buggy smart contract!
- qbasic_forever 4y ago
  LMAO the supply chain attack potential is epic. Oopsie the author of leftpad clicked the wrong button and now an unknown entity owns their package and just updated it with malicious content!
  - beckingz 4y ago
    Regular phishing. Oopsie!
  - hailwren 4y ago
    How is this different from our current signing key system?
    - qbasic_forever 4y ago
      My signing keys aren't tied to obscure 'smart contracts' that execute code when I do things like try to delete them.
    - cuteboy19 4y ago
      If you are pwned you can contact pypi and get it fixed
- kergonath 4y ago
  No such a thing as a buggy smart contract. The contract is right by definition, and that is what was agreed upon. Therefore, it’s the humans who signed it who are buggy. Or something. I wish I was joking.
  - shepherdjerred 4y ago
    I'm a bit confused. What you said is factually correct, but you're coming off as though you disagree with it. The first thing I was ever taught in my formal CS education is that the computer is (nearly) always right -- if there's a bug it's the programmer's fault. How is that not the case with a smart contract? How is that not the case in the real-world when there are loopholes in laws and contracts? Obviously you can always ask the courts for remediation in the real-world, but let me please point you to many examples where courts make an incorrect/unreasonable decision.
mjburgess 4y ago
It doesnt seem we're far away from any mention of "cypto" being a reason to flag (/ report spam). As the economic recession accelerates, one of its few joys will be the charlatans paying on super-easy-mode being exposed for the useless players they are. I feel that the major cultish hype-cycle of the last decade is rolling back, and my stress levels are dropping.
- jrsj 4y ago
  Many tech companies are both unprofitable and contribute near 0 value to society. Not unique to crypto. Be careful what you wish for, or the only people left paying software engineers might be non technical companies who pay $80k a year.
  - mjburgess 4y ago
    Programmers provide high economic multipliers on business activity and are typically in a good position to extract a proportionate reward for doing so. If we kill off that group of people earning 300k+ in unproductive businesses, all the better. I'd prefer that money be invested in more productive tech, and i'd suppose would generally raise salaries -- since atm, ex hypoth., it is just being burnt
    - jrsj 4y ago
      I'd definitely prefer this outcome but I have a feeling we're going to go right back to where we were before as soon as interest rates come back down. Big tech starts aggressively overstaffing again while VCs pour money into mostly useless garbage. I've been doing this for awhile now, mostly in the startup space, and I'm not even sure if VCs care if there's even a viable business there. It often feels like a legal way of running what effectively amounts to a ponzi.
      - mjburgess 4y ago
        sure, SPAC IPO = dump part of pump & dump However, just as ponzi in fiance was culturally and legally pushed out --- i'd imagine it will now in tech. I suspect regulation and cultural scepticism will arise which secures the next two or three decades against this, 'as a rule'
KennyBlanken 4y ago
On top of which I want literally nothing to do with Max Howell. He's the consummate brogrammer douche. Whined about getting asked to do a code exercise at a google interview, bragging about how he made a project in use by X percent of the company's engineers. He should go to a few conferences, introduce himself under another name, and bring up brew. I'd guess after half a dozen encounters he'd stop incessantly bragging about being the creator of brew. Everyone uses brew because they have to, not because they want to. I'm torn between the brew team being full of insufferable people because they don't know this, and arrogant because they do know it...
- pasc1878 4y ago
  Why do you have to use brew - there are other package managers for macOS new ones like nixpkgs and ones much older than brew like Macports and Fink. All of these follow normal Unix standards e.g. like work on a multi user system.
  - mikelevins 4y ago
    You don't absolutely have to use brew, but there's a sort of relentless soft pressure to use it because it's more or less the de facto standard package manager for macOS and has such a large collection of packages. I rather dislike it, and I periodically purge it from my system. So far I've always ended up reluctantly adding it back because I was trying out some tool or other that was dramatically more of a pain to install without brew. I can get by for a long time without it, but then I want to try out something that assumes brew, or whose dependencies assume brew, and it winds up back on my system again until I get vexed enough to remove it again.
    - kergonath 4y ago
      > it's more or less the de facto standard package manager for macOS and has such a large collection of packages I definitely see the social pressure. That said, I’ve never needed to use it because I needed a package that was not on Macports. So far for my use no difference in the number of packages in the default repositories has been meaningful.
la64710 4y ago
Where is this mentioned? I was getting all excited reading the README file of tea until I saw this comment. Thank you!
- RL_Quine 4y ago
  Quote is directly from https://tea.xyz/tea.white-paper.pdf https://tea.xyz/tea.white-paper.pdf
chopete3 4y ago
Isn't the email proof of ownership. Why do they need an NFT? The owner can change the email to another one when no longer wants to manage. NFT seeems an overkill and author drank too much crypto-aid.
- politician 4y ago
  Not everyone runs their own mail servers. This is no different from requiring proof of identity using an SSH key like you do with GitHub.
drc500free 4y ago
How does creating this NFT cause it to have value, and therefore reward the package maintainer? If the issue is that no one is putting money into the system, the solution can't be a more complicated way of ensuring that the non-existent money goes to the right person.
gigatexal 4y ago
I was excited until this crypto NFT bullshit. Smh.
pixel_tracing 4y ago
To be fair this is kind of a cool idea which is to allow open source package maintainers to earn based on popularity, the incentives here seem interesting at least. However I highly doubt the original intention behind the NFT collaboration was altruistic to begin with. Meaning at this point I don’t really trust any altruism in crypto in general (“hey we’re not trying to scam you we really are trying to change the world”). The idea itself though was interesting to me: getting paid on a token based system for maintaining your open source package
firexcy 4y ago
Didn't find any reference in the readme, but was almost sure it's crypto-related the moment I saw the header image; the silly design style is so endemic that it simply shouts crypto on the visitor's face.

jerpint 4y ago

What makes you think this is a pump and dump scheme? Other than the word blockchain

j4hdufd8 4y ago
The word NFT
RL_Quine 4y ago
The website linked, and it's associated information all absolutely scream red flags and is functionally similar to a hoard of other schemes. It's a technically simple product (distribute binaries from a webserver) with a completely arbitrary cryptocurrency stuffed onto the side, allowing for bombastic, buzzword filled claims which just defy reality. It attempts to promote itself by driving users who will get some form of profit sharing as part of their participation, promising some sort of rewards paid by the creator. > Package maintainers will publish their releases to a decentralized registry powered by a Byzantine fault-tolerant blockchain to eliminate single sources of failure, provide immutable releases, and allow communities to govern their regions of the open-source ecosystem, independent of external agendas. It's existence is an attempt to justify the creation of yet another cryptocurrency, not as a serious solution to any problem that exists in distributing software.
- febeling 4y ago
  Is the fact that many maintainers burn out and earn no money and little recognition not a serious problem?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - duskwuff 4y ago
    That isn't a fact. Keep in mind that this scheme wouldn't reward the authors of software -- it rewards the people who create and upload packages. Those usually aren't the same people, and the maintainers that are most subject to burnout are the authors, not the packagers. It also appears to require those developers to purchase (or otherwise acquire) tokens before adding software to the packaging system.
    - shepherdjerred 4y ago
      > Keep in mind that this scheme wouldn't reward the authors of software -- it rewards the people who create and upload packages. Those usually aren't the same people, and the maintainers that are most subject to burnout are the authors, not the packagers. It creates an incentive to package software for the ecosystem, which is a pretty good goal to achieve for a package manager -- especially a brand new one where it would be hard to gain traction without a large number of packages.
  - Finnucane 4y ago
    This will pay them in quatloos, not money.
    - febeling 4y ago
      Many people will get some satisfaction out of it, if they only receive points or badges. Look at Stackoverflow or GH stars.
      - 4y ago
qbasic_forever 4y ago
Being associated with Binance.
P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
I don't doubt that the author if tea is well-meaning, I think the issue is how it's going to get used, which is what the other poster was referring to.

jakelazaroff 4y ago

Love to irreversibly lose control of my packages because of a phishing scam or a buggy smart contract!

qbasic_forever 4y ago
LMAO the supply chain attack potential is epic. Oopsie the author of leftpad clicked the wrong button and now an unknown entity owns their package and just updated it with malicious content!
- beckingz 4y ago
  Regular phishing. Oopsie!
- hailwren 4y ago
  How is this different from our current signing key system?
  - qbasic_forever 4y ago
    My signing keys aren't tied to obscure 'smart contracts' that execute code when I do things like try to delete them.
  - cuteboy19 4y ago
    If you are pwned you can contact pypi and get it fixed
kergonath 4y ago
No such a thing as a buggy smart contract. The contract is right by definition, and that is what was agreed upon. Therefore, it’s the humans who signed it who are buggy. Or something. I wish I was joking.
- shepherdjerred 4y ago
  I'm a bit confused. What you said is factually correct, but you're coming off as though you disagree with it. The first thing I was ever taught in my formal CS education is that the computer is (nearly) always right -- if there's a bug it's the programmer's fault. How is that not the case with a smart contract? How is that not the case in the real-world when there are loopholes in laws and contracts? Obviously you can always ask the courts for remediation in the real-world, but let me please point you to many examples where courts make an incorrect/unreasonable decision.

mjburgess 4y ago

It doesnt seem we're far away from any mention of "cypto" being a reason to flag (/ report spam). As the economic recession accelerates, one of its few joys will be the charlatans paying on super-easy-mode being exposed for the useless players they are. I feel that the major cultish hype-cycle of the last decade is rolling back, and my stress levels are dropping.

jrsj 4y ago
Many tech companies are both unprofitable and contribute near 0 value to society. Not unique to crypto. Be careful what you wish for, or the only people left paying software engineers might be non technical companies who pay $80k a year.
- mjburgess 4y ago
  Programmers provide high economic multipliers on business activity and are typically in a good position to extract a proportionate reward for doing so. If we kill off that group of people earning 300k+ in unproductive businesses, all the better. I'd prefer that money be invested in more productive tech, and i'd suppose would generally raise salaries -- since atm, ex hypoth., it is just being burnt
  - jrsj 4y ago
    I'd definitely prefer this outcome but I have a feeling we're going to go right back to where we were before as soon as interest rates come back down. Big tech starts aggressively overstaffing again while VCs pour money into mostly useless garbage. I've been doing this for awhile now, mostly in the startup space, and I'm not even sure if VCs care if there's even a viable business there. It often feels like a legal way of running what effectively amounts to a ponzi.
    - mjburgess 4y ago
      sure, SPAC IPO = dump part of pump & dump However, just as ponzi in fiance was culturally and legally pushed out --- i'd imagine it will now in tech. I suspect regulation and cultural scepticism will arise which secures the next two or three decades against this, 'as a rule'

KennyBlanken 4y ago

On top of which I want literally nothing to do with Max Howell. He's the consummate brogrammer douche. Whined about getting asked to do a code exercise at a google interview, bragging about how he made a project in use by X percent of the company's engineers. He should go to a few conferences, introduce himself under another name, and bring up brew. I'd guess after half a dozen encounters he'd stop incessantly bragging about being the creator of brew. Everyone uses brew because they have to, not because they want to. I'm torn between the brew team being full of insufferable people because they don't know this, and arrogant because they do know it...

pasc1878 4y ago
Why do you have to use brew - there are other package managers for macOS new ones like nixpkgs and ones much older than brew like Macports and Fink. All of these follow normal Unix standards e.g. like work on a multi user system.
- mikelevins 4y ago
  You don't absolutely have to use brew, but there's a sort of relentless soft pressure to use it because it's more or less the de facto standard package manager for macOS and has such a large collection of packages. I rather dislike it, and I periodically purge it from my system. So far I've always ended up reluctantly adding it back because I was trying out some tool or other that was dramatically more of a pain to install without brew. I can get by for a long time without it, but then I want to try out something that assumes brew, or whose dependencies assume brew, and it winds up back on my system again until I get vexed enough to remove it again.
  - kergonath 4y ago
    > it's more or less the de facto standard package manager for macOS and has such a large collection of packages I definitely see the social pressure. That said, I’ve never needed to use it because I needed a package that was not on Macports. So far for my use no difference in the number of packages in the default repositories has been meaningful.

la64710 4y ago

Where is this mentioned? I was getting all excited reading the README file of tea until I saw this comment. Thank you!

RL_Quine 4y ago
Quote is directly from https://tea.xyz/tea.white-paper.pdf https://tea.xyz/tea.white-paper.pdf

chopete3 4y ago

Isn't the email proof of ownership. Why do they need an NFT? The owner can change the email to another one when no longer wants to manage. NFT seeems an overkill and author drank too much crypto-aid.

politician 4y ago
Not everyone runs their own mail servers. This is no different from requiring proof of identity using an SSH key like you do with GitHub.

drc500free 4y ago

How does creating this NFT cause it to have value, and therefore reward the package maintainer? If the issue is that no one is putting money into the system, the solution can't be a more complicated way of ensuring that the non-existent money goes to the right person.

gigatexal 4y ago

I was excited until this crypto NFT bullshit. Smh.

pixel_tracing 4y ago

To be fair this is kind of a cool idea which is to allow open source package maintainers to earn based on popularity, the incentives here seem interesting at least. However I highly doubt the original intention behind the NFT collaboration was altruistic to begin with. Meaning at this point I don’t really trust any altruism in crypto in general (“hey we’re not trying to scam you we really are trying to change the world”). The idea itself though was interesting to me: getting paid on a token based system for maintaining your open source package

firexcy 4y ago

Didn't find any reference in the readme, but was almost sure it's crypto-related the moment I saw the header image; the silly design style is so endemic that it simply shouts crypto on the visitor's face.