As far as I can tell this is the only coin that does actual trustless atomic trading between separate chains.
I read somewhere Dan did the first trade almost a year ago. Surprising it's taken this long to start getting recognition.
We weren't happy with the implementation.
We've effectively built this thing three times, and now the security approach is where we want it to be, and the architectural direction is clear (i.e. how to best function as infrastructure for the token ecosystem).
As for the risk that a new project may steal our thunder, I'm not concerned. We have a solid community, widespread awareness of our first-mover status, a growing user base of cryptocurrencies, and increasing developer interest. Who'd contribute to some random fork when they can contribute to the main branch?
That's the appeal of open source software, really.
Additionally, we're the ones who've pioneered the token ecosystem and the "inter-chain era" and have led the market by three years. It's not too likely that another team will have grasped the intricacies of supporting this vision and will be able to steer development in a strategic way.
But hey, one of the beauties of open source is that anyone is welcome to clone us. My feeling is that attempts of this nature will only lend further credibility to our work and boost our visibility.
Is there no way to obscure or encrypt part of the code and open source after a clear lead is established? I detest copy and pasters.
Many successful projects are only opening up all of their source after they have a few generations clear lead now.
There are obfuscation tools so people can see the source and build from it but it makes it almost impossible to make sense of the code.