Quote from: cinogrin on March 09, 2016, 03:25:09 AM

Just created an account to pipe in here... I think you guys are woefully under-explaining the Microsoft thing. It's very simple: they'll offer pre-packaged SPR-enabled cloud instances if an application is submitted and the code is vetted as safe for their platform. Nothing about this "moves" the SpreadCoin network. Nothing about this changes SpreadCoin. Nothing about this forces or even persuades SPR users to start using Azure services *unless* they, of their own volition, find it convenient to assist in the operation or development of SPR-related services.

Ethereum, Factom, Emercoin and several more coins have been accepted to this platform. None of them are in a "partnership" with Microsoft. None of them have "moved" to the Microsoft network. None of them have changed any of their code, governance, licensing, funding, or anything else about their project. I honestly have no idea where the concept of moving the SpreadCoin network to a centralized partnership with overlord Microsoft comes from, but it's waaaaaaaay off the mark of what's actually been offered/implemented. Having not gone through the application myself, I can't be sure, but from what I can infer from the experiences of other projects, the vetting process seems to be self-contained to a code-safety review within Microsoft.

As for why it would be advantageous (aside from the price/investor confidence/growth), I believe this is a completely benign program to participate in that doesn't threaten decentralization, arguably increasing it through easier, immediate, and reliable end-user access to SPR services and development. If PayPal said they're accepting SpreadCoin to process payments and SPR doesn't have to change anything about themselves - would you consider that centralization? Would you be wary of such an integration? This isn't the same level, but it's similar. You have a platform with major exposure, solid support, and in this case, a particularly forward-thinking team behind it for coming from such a corporate behemoth (who else is doing Blockchain-as-a-Service, seriously?) and they've read the SPR whitepaper and would be happy to help support the SPR community and ecosystem by offering it on their experimental and forward-thinking BaaS platform.

I honestly don't see how this can be perceived as a threat or a dangerous thing. If the service sucks, no one uses it. If Azure makes no money off of BaaS, it ceases to be offered. If they offer reliable service for an attractive price, enabling developers and users to access SPR more easily or more economically, then all this is, is decentralized infrastructure (you do know what Azure is, right?) building around SpreadCoin. Frankly I'm stunned that the de facto project lead on SPR is so under-informed on his main competitors/counterparts, and what's happening in this business space. Not trying to be a dick, but you probably need some more hands on deck with various strengths and knowledge. Beyond the code. And then you need to seriously consider to their advice, the hard part. Wink

I've been with spread since Mr. Spread launched it, btw, had an old account here that I deleted last year, used to be a "Hero" - some would probably remember me. Anyway, I stop in every month or so just to see what's happening, and I had to clarify this Microsoft misunderstanding going on. Good luck with whatever direction the project goes, still have coins in the vault and watching curiously.

Thank you for explaining! I was so confused reading this thread not knowing what's it all about and people losing limbs fighting about it.