My thoughts on this are not going to be popular, but here we go …
I think that the shut down of ReddAPI highlights the biggest problem with Reddcoin as we know it: centralization. All of the power is possessed by one person … just as all of the power for the API was possessed by one person. And, just as ReddAPI was shut down when one person became disgruntled, Reddcoin could likewise be derailed should the one person with all of the power become similarly disgruntled. Bringing the Reddcoin API in-house will only serve to further centralize development of the coin and, in my humble opinion, further alienate the crypto-community. No one has, or is going to have, faith in an alt-coin that is wholly controlled by the whims of one person.
It doesnt further centralize reddcoin if a reddapi-like site or service is brought in house and open sourced. Someone has to code it, so yes for a short time it would be centralized while being built. However, if they do so with the intention of open sourcing it, its no longer centralized.
Some features of reddcoin are obviously going to be proprietary, if that scares people they should not use:
- Google Chrome
- The Internet
Whatever reddcoin creates, that happens to be proprietary, (from what I can gather) will still remain decentralized in a way that makes it almost impossible to shut down. Decentralized in a way that not one single entity besides the person using it, holds the keys to their coin. THATS the difference.
Are we supposed to all add a snippet of code to the wallet exe, social x, redd-id, browser wallet? In order to make people feel better about the development also being decentralized? Because I personally am not a dev like that and Im not sure many are.
Even if they/we were coders, asking everyone to contribute a snippet of code so they feel better about it not being centralized while being built is a non starter.
So yes, while something is being built, it all hinges on the person or group building it. Yes it is centralized while being built. ReddApi however was from what I can see, production ready and closed source… And obviously not decentralized, yet the dev of reddapi chooses to complain about reddcoin. Thats ironic.
I just have a sneaking suspicion that those who complain about reddcoin fall in one of the following brackets:
- Arent actual fans of reddcoin
- Is not taking the proper time to understand what is heppening
- Does not understand the intention of Reddcoin devs or community supporting it
- Are too invested in Reddcoin that they are allowing “what ifs” to scare the crap out of them
There is probably 200 coins right now that need devs, anyone who is scared right now or doesnt agree with Reddcoin’s devs have their choice of coins to create or take over and build exactly what they envision.
Reddcoin does not have a centralization problem. Anyone who takes the time to understand any of the papers or has ran a project themselves, would understand that.
“Having Devs” is NOT a centralization problem.
Most of us know, if we were to generalize what reddcoins next move is, is to be changetip times 100 and decentralized… To be the coin that noobs can use. To be the standard for a social currency, which really doesnt exist except for in the form of upvotes and likes. To allow social “transactions, purchases” which would be the next evolution once masses start to use it.
What would start out as tipping, would end up as a transactable currency used for purchases between people.